Orissa High Court Weekly Round Up : May 16 To May 22, 2022

Nominal Index: 1. Roshni Meher v. State of Odisha, 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 68 2. M/s. Oripol Industries Ltd., Balasore v. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Balasore and Ors., 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 69 3. Amitav Tripathy v. Orissa High Court, represented by the Registrar General, 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 70 4. Emcure Pharmaceuticals Ltd v. The Managing Director, Odisha State Medical Corporation & Ors., 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 71 5. Baisakhu Sethy @ Behera v. State of Odisha, 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 72 6. Sambara Sabar v. State of Odisha & Ors., 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 73 7. State of Odisha & Ors. v. Larsen and Toubro Ltd., 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 74 8. State of Odisha, represented by the Asst. District Veterinary Officer (Disease Control), Balasore v. Kailash Chandra Mallick & Ors., 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 75 9. Mita Das v. State of Odisha & Ors., 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 76 10. Prasant Kumar Jagdev v. State of Odisha, 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 77 11. Daku @ Dasarathi Dehury v. State of Odisha, 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 78 12. Bimalendu Pradhan v. State of Odisha & Ors., 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 79 13. Milan @ Makardhwaja Khadia v. State of Odisha, 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 80 Judgments/Orders Reported This Week: 1. Child In Conflict With Law Gets Bail After 3 Yrs Custody; Orissa High Court Raps Police For 'Lackadaisical Attitude' Case Title: Roshni Meher v. State of Odisha Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 68 The Court granted bail to a child in conflict with law on Thursday after she remained in custody for over 'three years'. A Single Judge Bench of Justice V. Narasingh came down heavily on the police for its apathetic approach and observed, "Proceedings of the High Court cannot be held hostage to the whims of the investigating agency and for their lackadaisical attitude, rights of an accused cannot be marginalized, needs no emphasis." The Court hoped that necessary corrective action shall be taken so as to make the Police machinery more responsive to the needs of administration of justice. 2. Commission Paid To Persons Who Are Not Beneficial To Business Of Assessee Is Taxable: Orissa High Court Case Title: M/s. Oripol Industries Ltd., Balasore v. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Balasore and Ors. Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 69 The High Court dismissed a challenge against an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Cuttack (ITAT) which disallowed commission expenses as claimed by the appellant. It held that the appellant was not able to prove the expertise of persons to help him in business to whom the said commission was paid. Denying the arguments of the appellant, a Division Bench of Chief Justice Dr. S. Muralidhar and Justice Radha Krishna Pattanaik observed, "In the present case, all the persons to whom commission was paid were either Directors of the Company or their relatives. None of them is shown to have any expertise in procuring IOF from the Indian markets for enabling the Appellant to meet the purchase order placed on it for IOF. The amounts paid as commission were also not insubstantial." 3. Candidate In 'Direct District Judge Recruitment Exam' Fails To Qualify For Interview By 1 Mark After Revaluation; Orissa HC Dismisses Case Case Title: Amitav Tripathy v. Orissa High Court, represented by the Registrar General Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 70 The High Court dismissed the writ petition filed by Mr. Amitav Tripathy, who had challenged marks assigned to him in the examination conducted for direct recruitment from the Bar in the cadre of District Judge. A Division Bench of Chief Justice Dr. S. Muralidhar and Justice Radha Krishna Pattanaik, in its order passed on 11th May 2022, had observed the case to be "rare and exceptional" and had ordered the Registrar (Examinations) to send two questions for revaluation by a 'Law Expert'. The revaluated answer-sheet was produced before the Court. After such revaluation, the petitioner got only additional 0.5 mark, which was 1 mark less than the qualifying marks for the interview. Thus, the Court dismissed the petition and observed, "The net result is that the candidate gets just 0.5 mark additional for the answer to Question No.1 in Group-D. In all, therefore, the Petitioner secures 45.5 + 0.5 i.e. 46 marks. Since he does not secure 47% in paper II, there is no scope for calling him for interview." 4. Invocation Of Arbitration Clause In Tender Document Is Possible Only If Purchase Order Is Placed: Orissa High Court Case Title: Emcure Pharmaceuticals Ltd v. The Managing Director, Odisha State Medical Corporation & Ors. Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Ori) 71 The High Court has ruled that till a purchase order is issued by the tenderee pursuant to the acceptance of an offer to supply, no completed 'contract' arises between the parties and thus the arbitration clause contained in the tender document is not attracted. A Single Judge Bench of Chief Justice Dr. S. Muralidhar...

Orissa High Court Weekly Round Up : May 16 To May 22, 2022

Jyoti Prakash Dutta

Tags