Court : Orissa
Reported in : AIR1985Ori84
G.B. Patnaik, J. 1. Plaintiff is the appellant against an affirming judgment.2. The second appeal came up before our learned brother Dr. Justice B. N. Misra who did not agree with the views expressed by our learned brother Justice B. K. Ray, as he then was, in Second Appeal No. 161/77 (Madhab Biswal v. Aintha alias Pabana Senapati) disposed of on 2-1-1979 and followed by learned brother Justice R. N. Misra (as he then was) in the case of Ghasi Paikray v. Dinabandhu Muduli, reported in (1980) 50 Cut LT 108 with regard to interpretation of Sub-section (2) of Section 40 of the Orissa Land Reforms Act (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') and directed that the appeal should be heard by a Division Bench. Since the second appeal has been placed before the Division Bench for disposal, we will not only decide the question of law with regard to interpretation of Sub-section (2) of Section 40 of the Act but also finally dispose of the appeal itself and, therefore, it is necessary to state the f...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
HIGH COURT OF ORISSA: CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.7693 of 2011 In the matter of an application under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India. ---------All India Networks Welfare Trust, Represented through its Managing Trust-cumFounder President, K.Selvaraj, Son of Late karuppaswamy, 1/A, M.S.K.S. Building No.3, 3rd Floor, Seshadripuram, Bangalore020. and others . Petitioners . Opp. parties -Vs.Superintendent of Police, Criminal Investigation Department, Crime Branch, Odisha, AT/PO/Dist: Cuttack and others. For Petitioners : Mr.Bijan Ray, Sr. Advocate M/s. B.P.Nayak, B.Mohanty, S.Mohanty & B.Moharana [For Petitioner Nos. 1 and 2]. M/s Sidharth Prasad Mishra, B.K.Nayak, D.P.Patra, R.Rath, D.Mishra & D.Behera M/s. A.K.Behera, & S.K.Mahanta M/s K.P.Mishra, S.Mohapatra, T.P.Tripathy M/s. K.M.Mishra, R.K.Nanda, S.Chakrabarty & T.Sinha [For intervenor-petitioners) For Opp. Parties : Mr. Debasis Panda, Addl. Government Advocate, [For O.P. No.1]. M/s. N. K. Dash, S.K.Barik, S.K.Nayak & A.P.Rath ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : 106(2008)CLT245; (2008)15VST228(Orissa)
B.N. Mahapatra, J.1. The petitioner, in this writ petition calls in question, the legality of the order dated June 28, 2006 passed by the Assistant Commissioner, Sales Tax, (LTU) Cuttack-II Range, Cuttack (hereinafter called the 'the ACST') under Section 30 of the Orissa Value Added Tax Act, 2004 (hereinafter called 'the OVAT Act') whereby claim of the petitioner that furnace oil qualifies to be an 'input' for the purpose of availing input tax credit was rejected. Consequently, a tax demand to the tune of Rs. 32,26,909 was raised by that order.The facts which give rise to the present writ petition are set out below.2. The petitioner in the present case is a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 having its registered office at 3rd Floor, Maker Chambers-IV, 222, Nariman point, Mumbai-400 021 and factory at Laxmi-nagar, Baulpur, Dhenkanal. It is a dealer registered under the OVAT Act. It manufactures polyester staple fibres (hereinafter referred to as, 'the PSF') through Oris...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : 2008CriLJ2909; 2008(I)OLR666
ORDERM.M. Das, J.1. A common question having been raised in all these bail applications, the same were heard together. Out of the above cases, the BLAPL Nos. 7840, 8580, 8690, 8896, 8974, 8986, 9948, 10559, 10826, 11737 and 12903 of 2007 are applications filed under Section 438, Cr.P.C. and BLAPL Nos. 11222 and 12061 of 2007 are filed under Sections 439, Cr.P.C. In all these cases offence under Section 47 (a) of the Bihar and Orissa Excise Act, 1915 (hereinafter referred to as 'the State Act') has been alleged.2. Mr. S. Pradhan, learned Counsel appearing for the State raised a preliminary objection with regard to grant of bail to the petitioners. He contended that in view of the new Section 85-A introduced into the State Act, which has come into force with effect from 01.06.2006, a bar has been created for granting bail to the accused, who is alleged to have committed an offence under the Act punishable for a term of imprisonment of seven years or more. Such accused can only be granted...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : 102(2006)CLT858; 2006(II)OLR720
A.K. Parichha, J.1. This is an appeal under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act (in short, 'the Act') filed by the Special Land Acquisition Officer, Lanjigarh Road-Junagarh Rail link project, Bhawanipatna challenging the award dated 1.9.2001 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Bhawanipatna in M.J.C. No. 141 of 1997.2. On the basis of notification under Section 4 Sub-section (1) of the Act, 1.39 decimals of land in Holding No. 14 of Village-Sinangbhata in the district of Kalahandi belonging to the claimant-respondent Nos. 1 to 6 (in short 'claimants') was acquired for construction of Lanjigarh Road, Junagarh Rail Link Project, as. per Government Notification No. 36652 dated 17.4.1995 and declaration No. 40941 dated 16.09.1995. After conducting necessary inquiry the appellant awarded a compensation of Rs. 21,023.10 paise in favour of the claimants who received that amount under protest claiming higher compensation. On the prayer of the claimants the matter was referre...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : 1998CriLJ1553
P.K. Mohanty, J.1. This is an appeal by the convict in a case under Section 302 IPC sentencing him to undergo life imprisonment.2. Prosecution case, bereft of unnecessary details is that on 16-11-1989 at about 8 P.M. while Damodar Patel, P.W. 1 had gone to attend the call of nature near river Hati, he found one dead body lying on the sandy bed of the river. The dead body was without any wearing apparel except one chadi. Pant and Shirt were lying at a distance from the dead body. One motor cycle bearing Regn. No. (sic) 2488 was kept by the side of the pillar of the bridge. Damodar Patel, P.W. 1 came to village Katpadi and told the incident to Madhu Naik, Ward Member of the village. P.W. 1 along with Madhu Naik, came to the police station at Jaipatna and orally reported the incident in the Police Station. P.W. 21, the Investigating Officer on the report registered M.D. Case No. 9 of 1989 in absence of the Officer-In-Charge of the Police Station. The Investigating Officer while conducting...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : 84(1997)CLT357; 1997CriLJ2843; 1997(I)OLR71
Dipak Misra, J. 1.Gone are the days of yore when an Emperor like Babar, at the cost of his life prayed for an ailing son ; vanished are the days of old when an obedient son like Rama chose his way to the forest sacrificing the royal throne and disappeared is the era when a casabianca stood imbedded on the burning dock in honour of his father's command. Here is an unfortunate case where the father and the brother, succumbing to their inferior endowments from nature, arrived at the police station and lodged a written report (Ext. 2) complaining about the drug addiction as well as the clandestine drug business of the appellant. In promptitude a station diary entry was made to that effect and information was sent to the Town Inspector. Raiding party inclusive of independent witnesses went to the houses of the Informant where the aappellant resided and recovered from hit custody three small packets containing 1350 ml. grams of heroin and another small packet containing 1150 ml. grams 'Ganja...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : (1995)125CTR(Ori)271; [1995]211ITR593(Orissa)
G.B. Patnaik, J. 1. On an application being filed under Sub-section (2) of Section 256 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, at the instance of the Revenue, this court has formulated the following question and called upon the Revenue to make the statement of case. The question formulated was ;'Whether the building has been validly transferred to the assessee and in case of invalidity of transfer whether the assessee is liable to be answered for the income derived from it ?'2. But after hearing Mr. Ray, learned standing counsel for the Department and on a scrutiny of the order of the Tribunal, we think it appropriate to reframe the question which arises for consideration as the question formulated is not proper and the question reframed by us is :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal erred in law in allowing the claim of the assessee for grant of depreciation in respect of Draupadi Talkies and Draupadi Ice Factory?'3. The two premises belong to one Prabhat Cha...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : AIR1990Ori51; 68(1989)CLT801
L. Rath, J.1. These two petitions at the instance of the same petitioner in essence raise the identical question for decision and hence are disposed of by this common judgment. The petitioner was the subscriber of four telephones and one telex, the telephone numbers being 51734, 53865 and 55061 in its office and 55482 at the residence of its Managing Director and the telex having the number 0675-267. The facts of O.J.C. No. 2310/89 which are not disputed and have also been supplemented by the learned counsel appearing for the opposite party, are that the petitioner came before this Court earlier in O.J.C. No. 2140/83 challenging the notice of disconnection issued on 30-6-88 by the Telecom. District Engineer, Department of Telecommunications, Bhubaneswar for outstanding dues as against telephone numbers 53865 and 51734. The telephones were disconnected and protest having been raised by the petitioner to the bills alleging excess metering, the department instituted an enquiry. The petiti...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : 37(1971)CLT330
A. Misra, J.1. The facts, in brief, so far relevant on which this application under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution is founded, are as follows:Uchashikshyasram High School of Village Kadaliban was started as a private institution in which the petitioner was appointed as an Asst. teacher by the Managing Committee in the year 1943 and he continued to serve there. In the year 1962, the State Government took over this institution along with other similar institutions situate at different places in the State declaring them as Government managed full deficit aided High Schools. The Managing Committee was abolished and a set of Rules as at Annexure' 1 were introduced for the management and administration of the institutions. Subsequent to the taking over of management of such institutions opposite parties effected transfers of teachers from one school to another, in the course of which, petitioner was transferred to Kolar-Joypur High School but later on ordered to rejoin his original...
Tag this Judgment!