Court : Orissa
Decided on : Jan-25-1973
Reported in : AIR1973Ori217
Patra, J.1. Santosh Kumar Asar-walla who is the petitioner in both the cases is a Forest Contractor at Angul deal-ins in Genduli gum which is a minor forest produce. For the year 1970-71 (wrongly mentioned as 1969-70 in the petition), the sale of Genduli sum of Angul Forest Division was notified by the Divisional Forest Officer, Aneul (O. P. No. 3) to be held by public auction on the 20th and 21st October, 1970. The notification was published in the Orissa Gazette dated 18-9-1970. and the auction was on 20-10-1970. The petitioner's bid for Rs. 2,100/- was the highest bid and the sale was knocked down in his favour. The petitioner deposited the security money of Rs. 210/-. The fact of the petitioner be-ins the highest bidder was duly communicated to the Conservator of Forests (O. P. No. 2) who in turn communicated to the State Government (O. P. No. 1) for finalisation of the agreement. The State Government instead of finalising the sale in favour of the petitioner passed the impugned or...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Decided on : Jan-25-1973
Reported in : (1973)ILLJ518Ori
R.N. Misra, J.1. The management of the the J. K. Paper Mills is petitioner in this application under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India.2. The company (J.K. Paper Mills) which is a concern of Messrs, Straw Products Limited commenced business at Jaykaypur near Rayagada in the district of Koraput in 1962. In 1964, the J. K. Paper Mills Employees' Union was registered under the Trade Unions Act and worked as sole representative union of workmen employed in the Mills. Dispute relating to bonus for the years 1964 and 1965 between the employer and the workmen was referred under the Industrial Disputes Act to the Tribunal and was registered as Industrial Dispute Case No. 20 of 1966. Similarly a dispute relating to bonus for the year 1966 was referred to the Tribunal in Industrial Dispute Case No. 24 of 1968. The J.K. Paper Mills had been declared as a public utility service as defined in Section 2(n) of the Industrial Disputes Act. Notice was given by the union on 26-8-1969 und...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Decided on : Feb-05-1973
Reported in : AIR1973Ori244; 1976CriLJ405
G.K. Misra, C.J. 1. By order of the Full Court to initiate a proceeding for contempt, the Registrar of the High Court issued the contempt notice dated 3-7-1972 (here-inafter to be referred to as the Notice) to Shri Baradakanta Misra, the alleged contem-ner (hereinafter to be referred to as the contemner) calling upon him to appear in person and to show cause on 3-8-1972 as to why be shall not be punished or any other appropriate order not be passed against him for contempt of the High Court. On 26-7-1972 the contemner filed a petition by way of preliminary reply. On 7-8-1972 be filed his show-cause application. The contemrer filed Criminal Appeal No. 174/72 before the Supreme Court to quash the notice. Therein he made the State of Orissa a party through its Chief Secretary. The Legal Re-membrancer-cum-the ex-officio Additional Secretary, Law Department, filed an affidavit (Annexure-1) before the Supreme Court on behalf of the State giving detailed history with reference to the averment...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Decided on : Feb-27-1973
Reported in : AIR1973Ori196
B.K. Ray, J. 1. Defendant No. 1 is the appellant against a reversing judgment.2. The plaintiffs instituted the suit out of which this appeal arises for creating a charge upon the properties described in schedule B of the plaint for their maintenance at the rate of Rs. 50-00 per month and for Rs. 2,000-00 towards the marriage expenses of plaintiff No. 2. The Plaint case, in short is, as follows: Plaintiff No. 1 is the wife and plaintiff No. 2 is the daughter of defendant No. 2. Defendants Nos. 1 and 2 are first cousins. Defendant No. 1 is separate in mess and property from defendant No. 2 since the time of their fathers. The properties described in Schedule B of the plaint belong to defendant No. 2 alone. Defendant No. I wanted his son to be adopted by defendant No. 2. Plaintiff No. 1 opposed this and hence defendant No. 1 bore a grudge against plaintiff No. 1. Defendant No. 1, therefore, instigated defendant No. 2 to ill-treat the plaintiffs and to stop maintaining them. Both defendant...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Decided on : Mar-05-1973
Reported in : AIR1974Ori29; 39(1973)CLT435
ORDERS.K. Ray, J. 1. The opposite party instituted M. S. No. 43 of 1968 for recovery of Rs. 20,000/- from the petitioner. The suit was decreed and the petitioner preferred First Appeal No. 146 of 1970 from that decree to this Court. During pendency of this First Appeal, the opposite party, decree-holder filed Ex. Case No. 8 of 1970 for recovery of the decretal dues and costs. The petitioner prayed for stay of the execution of the decree in the First Appeal, and stay was granted subject to the condition that the petitioner deposited costs which the decree-holder was at liberty to withdraw on furnishing security. Accordingly, the petitioner deposited Rs. 2041.55 p. towards costs and the decree-holder opposite party withdrew the same on furnishing security. The First-Appeal was, ultimately, allowed and the case was remanded to the trial Court for fresh disposal according to law. The plaintiff-opposite party, thereupon filed an application for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court which was...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Decided on : Mar-07-1973
Reported in : [1974]34STC347(Orissa)
G.K. Misra, C.J. 1. Messrs. Utkal Distributors Pvt. Ltd. (opposite party) were assessed to sales tax, with or without penalty, for the quarters ending 31st March, 1963, 30th June, 1963, 30th September, 1963, 31st December, 1963, and 30th June, 1964, on account of supplies of materials such has hard granite rubble stones, bond stones, etc. Against the orders of assessment, the opposite party preferred first appeals before the Assistant Commissioner, Sales Tax, Cuttack. The appeals were dismissed.In second appeal, the Tribunal by a common judgment passed on 23rd December, 1968, allowed the appeals and annulled the assessment holding that the contract in question was a works contract. The Tribunal refused to take in additional evidence a letter dated 22nd June, 1965, from the Under Secretary to the Government of Orissa in the Revenue Department to the Revenue Divisional Commissioner, under Rule 61 of the Orissa Sales Tax Rules, 1947, though it admitted a letter dated 9th January, 1968, fr...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Decided on : Mar-08-1973
Reported in : AIR1974Ori24; 39(1973)CLT539
R. N. Misra, J.1. This is an appeal under Section 110-D (1) of the Motor Vehicles Act of 1939 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) against the award of the Motor Vehicles Claims Tribunal, Balasore, dismissing the claim. 2. The appellant happens to be the mother of one Subodh Mohapatra who was travelling on 15-2-69 in a jeep bearing registration No. O. R. C. 7586 from Balasore to Soro. The claimant alleged that the vehicle was being driven rashly and at a considerable speed and while it was about 3 miles away from Soro at about 4 P.M. one of the rear tyres burst. The driver failed to control the vehicle and it ultimately went out of the road and capsized leading to the instantaneous death of Subodh.The jeep belongs to the respondent No. 1. An Oriya film 'Kie Kahara' was being exhibited at the Balasore Talkies during the material period. The Balasore Talkies arranged this jeep for the purpose of doing publicity work. Along with the driver and the cleaner the vehicle besides the publicity...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Decided on : Apr-27-1973
Reported in : AIR1974Ori115
Panda, J.1. This is a petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution seeking to quash a proposed action conveyed in Letter No. 17165 dated 31-7-1970 (Annexure 8) issued by the Secretary to the Government, Works and Transport Department, to the Chief Engineer, projects (Express Highway) suggesting leasing out of the road-side lands to the Express Highway No. 1 for agricultural and piscicultural purposes temporarily on annual basis to landless Harijans, preference being given to the Fishery Co-operative Societies of the landless Harijans.2. Facts leading to the above petition are as follows: Fortyfour decimals of land lying in village Saintipur belonging to petitioner Bishnu Charan Swain of village Padmalavpur, who is a non-Harijan, was acquired for the construction of the express Highway from Daitari to Paradip. Out of this land. 32 decimals appertain to Khata 12 and the balance to Khata 16. There was due notification for acquisition and there is no challenge that the compensat...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Decided on : Jun-01-1973
Reported in : [1974]34STC84(Orissa)
R.N. Misra, J.1. The following common question under Section 24(1) of the Orissa Sales Tax Act (briefly referred to as the Act) has been referred to this Court for determination : Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, it can be construed that there was a sale of gunny bags liable to payment of sales tax ?2. The three separate assessees at whose instance the references have been made carried on business of purchase and milling of paddy and thereafter sold the paddy (sic) at different places under directions of Government. While assessment proceedings were taken separately of these dealers, the assessing officer came to find that these dealers had not paid tax under the Act in respect of alleged sale of gunny bags. In S.J.C. 204 of 1970, the relevant assessment year is 1965-66; in S.J.Cs. 205 to 207 of 1970, we are concerned with quarters ending September and December, 1964, and March, 1965; and in S.J.Cs. 240 and 241 of 1970, the relevant period is quarters ending June, 1...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Decided on : Jun-01-1973
Reported in : [1975]36STC228(Orissa)
R.N. Misra, J.1. The following question has been referred under Section 24(1) of the Orissa Sales Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) for our determination :Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, ornaments decorated with filigree works are taxable at 2 per cent as per serial No. 1 or at the rate of 7 per cent as per serial No. 32 of the schedule of taxable goods ?This question is common to the two references and in view of the fact that the second appeals and the reference applications were heard together and one set of arguments was advanced before us, we propose to answer the question by this common judgment for both the references.2. In exercise of powers vested in the State Government under Section 5(1) of the Act, the notification dated 30th December, 1957, has been made fixing the rate of tax payable by a dealer on account of sale of goods specified in column (2) of the schedule attached to the said notification. Serial Nos. 1, 3-F and 32 of that schedule a...
Tag this Judgment!