Orissa High Court Monthly Digest: August 2022 [Citations 117-129]

Nominal Index:Babita Satpathy @ Mishra v. Sitanshu Kumar Dash & Ors., 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 117 Dr. Satya Narayan Bhujabala & Anr. v. Veer Surendra Sai Institute of Medical Science and Research, Burla and Ors., 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 118 State of Odisha represented by Commissioner of Sales Tax, Cuttack v. M/s. Geetashree Industries & Ors., 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 119 Abhisek Acharya & Ors. v. State of Odisha, 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 120 Smrutikant Rath & Ors. v. State of Odisha & Anr., 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 121 Faridabad Gurgaon Minerals v. Orissa Mining Corporation Ltd., 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 122 Tapan Kumar Pradhan v. State of Odisha, 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 123 Reckitt Benckiser (India) Ltd. versus State of Odisha and Others, 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 124 Hansmina Kumari Das & Ors. v. State of Odisha & Ors., 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 125 Nilakantha Tripathy v. State of Odisha & Ors., 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 126 Madhav Soren v. State of Odisha and Others, 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 127 Birla Institute of Management v. Fiberfill Interiors & Constructions, 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 128 Narayan Muduli v. State of Odisha & Ors., 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 129 Cases Reported In The Month: Objections To Admissibility Of Secondary Evidence Can Be Decided At Judgment Stage, Piecemeal Trial At Pre-Argument Stage Not Necessary: Orissa HC Case Title: Babita Satpathy @ Mishra v. Sitanshu Kumar Dash & Ors. Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 117 The High Court held that objections raised as to "mode of admissibility" of secondary evidence can be adjudicated upon by Trial Courts at the stage of judgment and there is no strict rule that it must be decided as and when objection is raised or before the commencement of arguments. A Single Judge Bench of Justice Krushna Ram Mohapatra observed, "It appears that the objection with regard to mode of admission of the document was raised, which is marked as exhibits by filing the instant petition. Since the learned trial Court has kept the objection open to be decided at the time of argument no prejudice will be caused to the Petitioners. Further, once a document has been exhibited with objection the same cannot be expunged from the evidence of the party unless circumstances thereto are established." Courts Should Be "Extremely Reluctant" To Impose Their Own Views In Academic Appointments: Orissa High Court Reiterates Case Title: Dr. Satya Narayan Bhujabala & Anr. v. Veer Surendra Sai Institute of Medical Science and Research, Burla and Ors. Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 118 The Orissa High Court reiterated that Courts should be extremely reluctant in imposing their own views disregarding the statutes or rules governing appointment in the field of academics. The Court declined to interfere in a petition, which sough intervention against denial of candidature for the want of 'chance certificate'. A Single Judge Bench of Dr. Justice Sanjeeb Kumar Panigrahi relied on the following observation from Maharashtra State Board of Secondary and Higher Secondary Education & Anr. v. Paritosh Bhupesh Kumar Sheth & Ors., "…the Court should be extremely reluctant to substitute its own views as to what is wise, prudent and proper in relation to academic matters in preference to those formulated by professional men possessing technical expertise and rich experience of actual day-to-day working of educational institutions and the departments controlling them. It will be wholly wrong for the Court to make a pedantic and purely idealistic approach to the problems of this nature, isolated from the actual realities and grass-root problems involved in the working of the system and unmindful of the consequences which would emanate if a purely idealistic view as opposed to a pragmatic one were to be propounded." Tax Exemptions Given With Benevolent Object, Approach For 'Exempting' & 'Including' Subject Matters Under Tax Purview Can't Be Same: Orissa HC Case Title: State of Odisha represented by Commissioner of Sales Tax, Cuttack v. M/s. Geetashree Industries & Ors. Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 119 The Orissa High Court held that the approach which is employed to exempt a commodity from the purview of taxation is not the same which is used to bring a good under the umbrella of taxation. While applying this principle, a Division Bench of Chief Justice Dr. S. Muralidhar and Dr. Justice Sanjeeb Kumar Panigrahi held that 'Chuni' is different from 'Cattle feed' under entry 66 of para-I of the Schedule attached to the Odisha Entry Tax Act, 1999 ('OET Act') and thus, the former is not amenable to entry tax under the statute. "It is one thing to say that a certain product was exempted for the purposes of taxation by virtue of interpretation of an exemption notification, it is another to say that it is amenable to tax by bringing it within the ambit of another product shown in the Schedule to the OET Act and, therefore, bringing it within the...

Orissa High Court Monthly Digest: August 2022 [Citations 117-129]

Jyoti Prakash Dutta

Tags