Privy Council Cases
Colonial & appellate judgments
Browse Privy Council & House of Lords decisions
Search appeals from Indian High Courts decided by the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council and related appellate benches - foundational authority for constitutional and commercial law.
Colonial & appellate
Results · Orissa
Banshidhar Onkarmal Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court : Orissa
Reported in : AIR1952Ori109
Narasimham, J.1. The question that has been referred by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Calcutta branch, Patna, to us for opinion is as follows:'Whether, in the circumstances of the case, the sum of RS. 8675/- is allowable either as a trading loss or an expenditure laid out or expended wholly and exclusively for the purposes of the business within the meaning of Section 10(2) (xii) of the Act' (Presumably Section 10 (2) (xii) is an error for Section 10 (2) (xv).2. The facts found by the Tribunal are these:3. The assessee carries on the business of selling yarn, seculating on cotton and money lending. He claimed deduction of Rs. 8,675/- in respect of the accounting year commencing from 21-10-1941 and ending on 8-12-1942 on the ground that the said sum was stolen from the iron-safe inside his shop by one Jhaharmal who was a relation of the assessee and who was also working as the accountant of his firm during the year in question. The shop of the assessee used to be closed at about 8 ...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax and Excess Profits Tax Vs. S. Sen and ors.
Court : Orissa
Reported in : AIR1952Ori89
Ray, C.J. 1. The proceeding arises out of two applications, consolidated, because of the facts being identical, by the Commissioner of Income-tax, Excess Profits Tax, Bihar and Orissa, under Section 66 (1) of the Income-tax Act read with Section 21 of the Excess Profits Tax Act for stating a case and opinion of this Court on the following (three) questions of law: (1) Whether in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in asking the income-tax Officer to assess the assessee on receipts basis with regard to contracts carried on and completed during the year of account? (2) Whether the reduction of the estimated profit rate from 40 per cent, adopted by the Income-tax Officer to 30 per cent, by the Tribunal on the ground that 30 per cent was the general rate adopted by it in the cases of other assessees doing the same kind of contract works during the same assessment year was legal? (3) Whether the Tribunal was right in not applying Rule 9 of Schedule 1 of the Excess Profits...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax and Excess Profits Tax, Bihar and Orissa Vs ...
Court : Orissa
Reported in : [1949]17ITR355(Orissa)
RAY, C.J - The proceeding arises out of two application consolidated because of the facts being identical, by the Commissioner of Income-tax/Excess profits Tax, Bihar and Orissa, under Section 66(1) of the Income-tax Act read with Section 21 of the Excess profits tax Act for the stating a case and a case stated for the opinion of this Court on the following three question of law :-'(1) Whether in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in asking the Income-tax Officer to assess the assessee on receipts basis with regard to contract carried on and completed during the year of account ?(2) Whether the reduction of the estimated profit rate form 40 per cent. adopted by the Income-tax Officer to 30 per cent. by the Tribunal on the ground that 30 per cent was the general rate adopted by it in the cases of other assessees doing the same kind of contract works during the same assessment year was legal (3) Whether the Tribunal was right in not applying rule 9 of Schedule I of the...
Tag this Judgment!Giridhari Biswal Vs. Golak Biswal and anr.
Court : Orissa
Reported in : AIR1949Ori27
Narasimham, J.1. This is the plaintiff's second appeal against the concurrent decisions of the Munsif of Jaipur and the Additional Subordinate Judge of Cuttack dismissing his suit for declaration of title and recovery of possession of certain property on the ground that he is the adopted son of one Bira Biswal.2. Defendant 1 is admittedly the natural born son of Bira Biswal. The plaintiff alleged that defendant 1 was given in adoption to Bira's own brother Nilamani about 0 years ago. Subsequently two other natural born sons of Bira died and then it was alleged that about 25 years ago Bira adopted the plaintiff as his son. It was further alleged that the plaintiff and defendant 1 remained joint till about 1913 when there was a partition of the joint family property. The suit was necessitated by the action of defendant 1 in mortgaging one item of the joint family property in favour of defendant 2. Defendant 1's main contention was that neither was he given in adoption to Nilamani nor was...
Tag this Judgment!Madhusudan Samantarai Vs. Brajasunder Das and ors.
Court : Orissa
Reported in : AIR1949Ori51
Ray, C.J.1. This appeal is by plaintiff 1 in a suit for declaration of his title as occupancy ryot in respect of 'ka' schedule lands being a part of holding No. 297. The holding admittedly be-longed to defendant 2 and the part, in dispute, was purchased from him by the appellant on 21st February 1927. The rest of the holding had been sold to plaintiffs 2 and 3 who, however, have not come up in appeal. Defendant 1 who is a purchaser at revenue sale of the touzis within which the holding lies, maintained a suit for recovery of arrears of rent against defendant 2 and brought the holding to sale in execution of the decree and purchased it. He took out delivery of possession through Court. The plaintiff feeling himself disturbed came to Court with a prayer for declaration of title and confirmation of possession or in the alternative for recovery of possession. The plaintiff had also, in order to make out a good title as against the landlord, pleaded that he bad taken the consent of the then...
Tag this Judgment!Biseswar Misra Vs. the King
Court : Orissa
Reported in : 1949CriLJ650
Jagannadhadas, J.1.The accused in this case who is the appellant before ua has been convicted of an offence under Section 366, Penal Code, and has been sentenced to 4 years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Es. be O and in default to another six months rigorous imprisonment. The case against him is that he kidnapped a minor girl, Asli by name who was below 16 in age and who is the married wife of one Gulthu Singh with the in-tantion of seducing her for sexual intercourse. The prosecution case is as follows:2. Asli, P. w. 13, is the married wife of one Gulthu Singh, p. w. l. She is below 16 years of age and was living with her husband at a place called Dhandatopa, There was a quarrel between them on a certain Friday, 17th January 1947 and as a result of that quarrel the girl left her husband's house on the morning of the next day 18th January 1947, when her husband was away from the house'.having gone to his work. He found her missing when he returned back to his house at 12 noon. The...
Tag this Judgment!Uchhab Bhol and ors. Vs. Sri Lord Jagannath and ors.
Court : Orissa
Reported in : AIR1949Ori80
Ray, C.J.1. This appeal by the defendants arises out of an action in tort for recovery of damages of Rs 7937-4-6 only. The defendants are 92 in number and impleaded as joint tort-feasors. The gist of the tort consists in 'a conspiracy to injure'. The main allegation in relation thereto is contained in para. 12 of the plaint:That on account of the said strained relations between the parties, the defendants entered into a conspiracy amongst themselves with an avowed object of flatting and carrying away the paddy crops from the disputed lands raised by the plaintiffs with their own ploughs.2. According to the earlier paragraphs of the plaint, the aforesaid malevolent conspiracy was but an easy and natural outcome of the Erbag. Village Krushak-Sangha under the leader-ship of one Mohan Das of which the purpose was to defy and disregard the privileges, so far enjoyed by the landlords, in their Nijdakhali lands so as to facilitate acquisition of tenancy rights therein.3. Common object of the ...
Tag this Judgment!Bhagabat Charan Jena and ors. Vs. Ram Narayan Mohanty
Court : Orissa
Reported in : AIR1951Ori271
Ray C.J.1. This is pltf's appeal in a suit for a declaration that the award passed by the Registrar, Co-operative Societies, is not binding: against them & for the consequential relief of restraining the society from executing the award against them.2. The pltfs. 2 & 3 are brothers & the pltfs. 1 & 4 to 1 are cousins of one Kali Charan Jena. In this appeal it is not controverted that they were members of a joint Hindu Mitakshara family with Kali Charan (deft. 2) at all material times. Kali Charan is a member of Routmandarini Co-operative Society of which deft. 1 (resp. 1) is the Secretary. Kali Charan, as a member, took a loan of Kb. 6C0 on 3-9 29 for the purpose of paying off Certain debts incurred for purchase of lands-a purpose recognised under the bye laws. In the Loan Register, he got certain persona as suraties, who undertook, the liability in case Kali Charan did not pay the loan to the Society. Ultimately, Kali Charan. not having been able to pay, there was a reference by the S...
Tag this Judgment!Akshoya Kumar Das and ors. Vs. Jagadish Misra and ors.
Court : Orissa
Reported in : AIR1949Ori56
Ray, C.J.1. This second appeal is by defendants 3 and 4, the landlord auction purchasers of an occupancy holding in execution of a rents decree obtained by them, in a suit for enforcement of a mortgage executed by the occupancy ryot on 18th May 1929 in favour of the plaintiff. The plaintiff's suit, filed on 15th June 1942, seeks to enforce the mortgage not only against the mortgagor or his successors-in-interest but also the landlord-auction-purchasers mentioned above.2. The defence of the appellants is that they possess a superior right in respect of the occupancy holding and their purchase is free from mortgage. This contention is based upon two grounds: (i) that they are the sole landlords of the occupancy holding which was non-transferable at the time when this mortgage was executed and as such is not binding against them nor can it affect the interest acquired by them at the execution sale ; and (ii) that they have, by recourse to legitimate measures prescribed in Section 221, Ori...
Tag this Judgment!Krishna Chandra Gajapati Narayan Deo Vs. Rokkam Venkatapparao Dora
Court : Orissa
Reported in : AIR1951Ori268
Narasimham, J.1. This is the pltf's second appeal against the order of the Dist. J. of Ganjam Pun reversing She decision of the Special Deputy Collector, Chicacole Division & dismissing the phtf's suit; for recovery of arrears of rent for the three Fasli years 1342 to 1844.2. This litigation has had a chequered career. The pltf's suit was brought in 1936 & it was first dismissed by the then Deputy Collector on 27-10-1937 in S. S. NO. 782 of 1936. On appeal, the Dist. J. set aside the order of dismissal & remanded the suit for fresh disposal. The suit was then heard by a Special Deputy Collector who decreed the claim. On appeal, the learned Diat. J. revsd. the decision of the Special Deputy Collector & dismissed the suit. There upon, the pltf. preferred a second appeal to the Hon'ble H. C. who directed the rehearing of the appeal by the Dist. J. on the ground that the lower appellate Ct. misconcieved the scope of the previous litigation between the parties in the year 1902. After remand...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »