High Court of Odisha dismissed the revision petition. The Court held that suppression of sales cannot be assumed without enquiry, citing a precedent. Additionally, the unexplained delay in filing barred the petition.
The revision petition was dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
STREV No.116 of 2019
State of Odisha …. Petitioner Mr. Susanta Kumar Pradhan, ASC
-versus-
M/s. Ankita Agencies
…. Opposite Party None
CORAM: THE CHIEF JUSTICE JUSTICE M. S. RAMAN
ORDER 20.12.2022
Order No.
I.A. No.235 of 2019
1. For the reasons stated therein, the application is allowed.
2. Filing of original/certified copies of the order under Annexures-1,
2 & 4 are dispensed.
STREV No.116 of 2019
Page 1 of 2
(Dr. S. Muralidhar)
Chief Justice
(M. S. Raman)
Judge
MRS/Laxmikant
Page 2 of 2
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the revision petition can be entertained given the absence of enquiry on suppression of sales.
Whether the delay in filing the revision petition is satisfactorily explained.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Gupta Distributor v. State of OdishaExplained¶14
STREV No.2 of 2008 ( Gupta Distributor v. State of Odisha), Judgment dated 22nd March, 2022
State of Odisha
M/s. Ankita Agencies
M. S. Raman
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
