Court : Orissa
Decided on : Nov-28-1981
Reported in : AIR1982Ori38; 53(1982)CLT57; (1982)ILLJ381Ori
..... case of sukhdev singh v. bhagatram sardar singh raghuvanshi, air 1975 sc 1331, where it was observed (at p. 1396) :--'..... a company incorporated underthe companies act is not created by the companies act but comes into existence in accordance with the provisions of the act .....'and also the observations in the case of sabhajit tewary v. union of india, air 1975 sc 1329, where chief justice ..... , where the question came up whether the indian rare earths limited -- a government company wholly owned by the union of india was 'state'. this court highlighted the aspects which led the learned judges in the airport authority case to hold that it was an instrumentality of government and found that a company registered under the companies act like the rare earths limited did not constitute .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Decided on : Mar-18-1981
Reported in : AIR1981Ori143; 51(1981)CLT437
..... 3) (hereinafter referred to as 'oscom') is a project under the said company operating at chatrapur within the territorial jurisdiction of this court, which is engaged in manufacture of radio-active sand and thorium in terms of the provisions of the atomic energy act, 1962. by notice (annexure 1) tenders were invited from competent contractors for execution ..... citizen and denial of equal opportunity to citizens carrying on business with it is justiciable; and (ii) laguna did not satisfy the requirements of rule 45 of the indian electricity rules, 1956 and, therefore, the work could not have been entrusted to it. 3. there is no dispute that in the tender notice there was ..... a justification in the face of the terms of the tender notice to accept the tender furnished beyond time.the next question for consideration is whether the indian rare earths limited is an instrumentality of the state. this question has been examined in three recent decisions of the supreme court, the first one being .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Decided on : Apr-27-1981
Reported in : AIR1981Ori206
..... k.n. misra, c.j.1. plaintiff, a company incorporated under the indian companies act with its registered office at calcutta, entered into a contract with the state of orissa through its ..... distinction as made by the supreme court ia borne in mind then the meaning of the language as provided in section 74 of the indian contract act becomes crystal clear. when it comes to the question of forfeiture of the security money because of the breach the sum forfeited does not ..... paid in case of breach, and stipulations by way of penalty,' the court again said (at p. 1411) :-- 'section 74 of the indian contract act deals with the measure of damages in two classes of cases (i) where the contract names a sum to be paid in case of ..... a contract in terrorem la a penalty and the court refuses to enforce it, awarding to the aggrieved party only reasonable compensation, the indian legislature has sought to cut across the web of rules and presumptions under the english common law, by enacting a unit form principle .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Decided on : Aug-27-1981
Reported in : [1982]50STC211(Orissa)
..... annexure-1, passed by the sales tax officer (opposite party no. 1), and for a direction that the application for refund be granted.2. the assessee, a company incorporated under the companies act, has a factory for manufacture of paper and board of various varieties at brajarajnagar in the district of sambalpur within the territorial jurisdiction of this court. the ..... , yet the tax becomes due and payable only when an assessment order is passed and a notice of demand under article 29 of the indian income-tax act, 1922, and article 156 of the income-tax act, 1961, is served upon the assessee. if there is no assessment order, the assessee is not liable to pay any tax. it ..... to wait till reassessments are completed in order to claim refund.the learned standing counsel relied upon the observations made by this court in the case of sinclair murray and company (pvt.) ltd. v. state of orissa [1970] 26 stc 451. that was a case where the point for consideration was whether the application for refund was .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Decided on : Oct-01-1981
Reported in : 1982CriLJ1156
..... accused persons. on 4-1-1977 the learned sessions judge, dhenkanal charged the appellant harihar and respondents dusasan, ekadasi, narahari bhaskar and four others under section 395, ipc on 11-5-1977 under orders of the high court this case was transferred to the court of the assistant sessions judge, dhenkanal for disposal. after p. ws ..... dagdu v. state of maharashtra : 1977crilj1206 it was held (para 21).there is no antithesis between section 133 and illustration (b) to section 114 of the evidence act because the illustration only says that the court 'may' presume a certain state of affairs, it does not seek t0 raise a conclusive and irrebuttable presumption. reading the ..... can it be called in aid by the prosecution to corroborate the evidence of p.w. 12.7. for the reasons stated above, the charge under section 395, ipc cannot be said to have been established against harihar, dusasan, ekadasi and narahari. criminal appeal no. 64 of 1978 is accordingly allowed, the conviction and sentence of .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Decided on : Oct-21-1981
Reported in : AIR1982Ori57
..... the subjects of the king residing in the kingdoms or provinces of bengal, bihar and orissa and to persons in the service of the company or of any of the subjects.8. an act (stat. 24 and 25 vict cap. 104) was passed by the british parliament in 1861 for establishing high courts of judicature in ..... high courts including the high court of judicature at fort william in bengal derived the authority to exercise such jurisdiction upon necessary declaration made by the indian legislature bv act xvi of 1891.10. post 1890 british statutes affecting the admiralty jurisdiction of the high court in england do not apply to the colonial courts of ..... upon a colonial court of admiralty.' pursuant to the aforesaid provision contained in section 3 of the 1890 act. the indian legislature passed act xvi of 1891. the colonial courts of admiralty (india) act. 1891 (hereinafter referred to as the 1891 act) wherein the high court of judicature at fort william in bengal, being a court of unlimited civil iurisdiction .....
Tag this Judgment!