TMI Blog1961 (3) TMI 111X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... itor General of India, B. M. Patnaik, S. N. Andley, J. B. Dadachanji and Rameshwar Nath, for the respondent JUDGEMENT MUDHOLKAR, J.- The appellant who, at the relevant time, was Under Secretary to the Board of Revenue, Orissa, has been admonished for contempt of court and directed to pay the costs of the proceedings before the High Court of Orissa. The occasion for the institution o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ature of the appellant. After the attention of the High Court was drawn to the aforesaid endorsement it caused notices to be issued not only to the Under Secretary to the Board of Revenue but also to the Legal Remembrancer of Orissa to show cause way they should not be committed for contempt., Both of them showed cause. The High Court absolved the Legal Remembrancer but convicted the appellant and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ision in Raghu Singh v. Abdul Wahab (1) was dissented from in Budhan Mahto v. Issur Singh (1) and it does not appear that this fact was brought to the notice of the Orissa High Court. The Legal Remembrancer to whom the matter was referred submitted a note which, according to the High Court, was something ambiguous and did not deal with all questions--consequential and ancillary . In spite of that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
