{"id":196861,"date":"2010-04-08T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-04-07T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-sponge-udyot-pvt-ltd-vs-unknown-on-8-april-2010"},"modified":"2015-12-17T10:40:44","modified_gmt":"2015-12-17T05:10:44","slug":"ms-sponge-udyot-pvt-ltd-vs-unknown-on-8-april-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-sponge-udyot-pvt-ltd-vs-unknown-on-8-april-2010","title":{"rendered":"M\/S. Sponge Udyot Pvt. Ltd vs Unknown on 8 April, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Orissa High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">M\/S. Sponge Udyot Pvt. Ltd vs Unknown on 8 April, 2010<\/div>\n<pre>                           L.MOHAPATRA, J &amp; B.P.RAY, J.\n<\/pre>\n<p>                 W.P.(C). No.6567 OF 2010 ( Decided on 08 04. 2010.)<\/p>\n<p>M\/S. SPONGE UDYOT PVT. LTD.                              &#8230;&#8230;&#8230;.petitioner\n<\/p>\n<p>                                            -V-\n<\/p>\n<p>THE ASST.COMMISSIONER OF SALES TAX,                        &#8230;&#8230;&#8230;..Opp.Party<br \/>\nROUTKELA-II CIRCLE, ROURKELA.\n<\/p>\n<p>ORISSA VALUE ADDED TAX ACT, 2004 (ACT NO. 4 OF 2005 ) &#8211; SEC.30.\n<\/p>\n<p>      For Petitioner &#8211; M\/s. A.K.Parija, P.P.Mohanty, S.P.Sarangi,<br \/>\n                       B.C.Mohanty &amp; P.K.Dash.\n<\/p>\n<p>      For Opp.Party &#8211; Shri Rudra Prasad Kar,<br \/>\n                       Standing Counsel (Commercial Taxes).\n<\/p>\n<p>L.MOHAPATRA, J. The petitioner, a Private Limited Company questions the legality<br \/>\nof the order in Annexure-2 passed by the opposite party suspending its registration<br \/>\ncertificate as a dealer.\n<\/p>\n<p>2.       The petitioner-Company has its factory at Jiabahal, Kalinga, in the district of<br \/>\nSundargarh and has registered itself under the Orissa Value Added Tax Act (OVAT). It<br \/>\ncarries on business of manufacturing and deals with pig iron, sponge iron, steel, alloy<br \/>\nsteel, iron ore, all Ferro and metals and also carries on different business connected<br \/>\nthereto. On 25.3.2010, a notice was issued to the petitioner under Rule 32(2) of OVAT<br \/>\nRules, 2005 requiring the petitioner to produce evidence, record\/documents on the<br \/>\nallegation that it has knowingly furnished incomplete\/incorrect information in the return<br \/>\nfurnished for the tax period\/periods and failed to pay tax, interest and penalty due under<br \/>\nthe Act for the said period. The other allegation is that the petitioner conducted business<br \/>\nin such manner that there is reasonable apprehension of evasion of tax or attempt to<br \/>\nevade tax. Though this notice was given in Annexure-1, copy of the order in Annexure-2<br \/>\nsuspending the registration certificate was not enclosed. After submitting application for<br \/>\nsupply of copy of the order of suspension, the same was supplied on 5.4.2010 whereas<br \/>\nthe order in Annexure-1 was passed on 25.3.2010. After obtaining a copy of the said<br \/>\norder, this writ application has been filed challenging the legality of the same solely on<br \/>\nthe ground that prior to issue of the said order the petitioner had not been given an<br \/>\nopportunity to show cause.\n<\/p>\n<p>3. Shri A.K. Parija, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner relied on a<br \/>\ndecision of this Court in the case of <a href=\"\/doc\/648536\/\">M\/s. Ramkumar Jaigopal v. Assistant<br \/>\nCommissioner of Sales Tax, Sambalpur,<\/a> reported in 2007 (I) OLR 534 and another<br \/>\ndecision of this Court in the case of Sidhartha Engineering Pvt. Ltd. v. Assistant<br \/>\nCommissioner of Sales Tax and another, reported in 1999, Vol.115, Sales Tax<br \/>\nCases, page-478 to support the above contention.\n<\/p>\n<p>4. The learned Standing Counsel for Commercial Tax Department opposed the petition<br \/>\non the ground that under the OVAT Act, prior to passing of an order of suspension,<br \/>\nthere is no requirement of issue notice to show cause and the petitioner can apply for<br \/>\nrestoration of the registration under the Act. Shri Kar, the learned counsel for the<br \/>\n Department further submitted that considering the allegation against the petitioner,<br \/>\nsuspension of the registration became absolutely necessary in order to stop the<br \/>\nbusiness. Keeping such eventuality in mind, the legislators never thought of issuance of<br \/>\na notice to show cause prior to suspension of the registration. So far as the two<br \/>\ndecisions cited by the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner is concerned, Shri Kar,<br \/>\nthe learned counsel appearing for the Department tried to distinguish both the decisions<br \/>\non facts.\n<\/p>\n<p>5.    Admittedly before issuance of the order of suspension, the petitioner had not been<br \/>\nserved with any notice to show cause. Admittedly there is no provision in the Act or the<br \/>\nRules for service of a notice to show cause before an order of suspension is passed.<br \/>\nUnder these circumstances, the Court is called upon to decide as to whether a notice in<br \/>\nthe present case is required to be served on the petitioner to show cause before the<br \/>\norder of suspension was passed or not. In the case of <a href=\"\/doc\/648536\/\">M\/s. Ramkumar Jaigopal v.<br \/>\nAssistant Commissioner of Sales Tax, Sambalpur, the<\/a> challenge was in relation to<br \/>\ncancellation of registration certificate. The petitioner therein was a registered dealer<br \/>\nunder the Sales Tax authorities for more than 58 years and without giving an<br \/>\nopportunity of hearing, the registration certificate was cancelled. The Court not only<br \/>\ndealt with Section 31 of the Act dealing with cancellation of certificate of registration but<br \/>\nalso Section 30 of the Act which dealing with suspension of registration certificate. In<br \/>\nparagraph-8 of the judgment relying on an earlier decision of the Hon&#8217;ble Supreme<br \/>\nCourt in the case of <a href=\"\/doc\/1766147\/\">Smt. Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India and<\/a> another, reported in<br \/>\nAIR 1978 SC 597, the Court made the following observation:\n<\/p>\n<p>             &#8221; xxx                     xxx               xxx               xxx<br \/>\n                It must be kept in mind that the power of suspension\/cancellation of<br \/>\n       registration certificate of a dealer, clearly imposes civil consequence and in this<br \/>\n       respect law is well settled in the case of <a href=\"\/doc\/1766147\/\">Smt. Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India<br \/>\n       and<\/a> another reported in AIR 1978 SC 597 wherein, the Apex Court has held<br \/>\n       that the rule of natural justice is embodied in every Statute and even where there<br \/>\n       is no specific provision for the same and when an administrative action involves<br \/>\n       civil consequence, the doctrine of natural justice must be held to be applicable.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>6. As is evident from reading of the judgment though the case related to cancellation<br \/>\nof registration certificate, the Court not only considered the question of cancellation of<br \/>\nregistration certificate but also suspension thereof and came to hold that the power of<br \/>\nsuspension\/cancellation of registration certificate of a dealer clearly imposes civil<br \/>\nconsequence and therefore, even where there is no specific provision to follow the<br \/>\nprinciples of natural justice, when an administrative action involves civil consequence,<br \/>\nthe doctrine of natural justice must be held to be applicable.\n<\/p>\n<p>      In the case of Sidhartha Engineering Pvt. Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Sales<br \/>\nTax and another, in paragraph-8 of the judgment, the Court held that natural justice is<br \/>\nan inseparable ingredient of fairness and reasonableness. Observance of the principles<br \/>\nis the pragmatic requirement of fair play in action. The rules of natural justice operate as<br \/>\nimplied mandatory procedural requirement and non-observance whereof invalidates the<br \/>\naction.\n<\/p>\n<p>      Reference may also be made to some other decisions in this connection. In the<br \/>\ncase of <a href=\"\/doc\/1159199\/\">Sahara India (Firm) v. Commissioner of Income-Tax and<\/a> another, reported<br \/>\nin (2008) 300 ITR 403 (SC) referring to large number of earlier decisions including the<br \/>\ncase of <a href=\"\/doc\/1766147\/\">Maneka Gandhi (Mrs.) v. Union of India<\/a> (supra), the Hon&#8217;ble Supreme Court<br \/>\n came to a conclusion that even an administrative order or decision in matters involving<br \/>\ncivil consequences has to be made consistently with the rules of natural justice. The<br \/>\nconcept of natural justice is invariably read into administrative actions involving civil<br \/>\nconsequences, unless the statute conferring the power excludes its application by<br \/>\nexpress language. A similar view was expressed by this Court in the case of <a href=\"\/doc\/1731495\/\">M\/s. Iron<br \/>\nExchange India Ltd. V. State of Orissa and others<\/a>, reported in 1995 (I) OLR 402.<br \/>\nThe Court held in the aforesaid decision that principle of natural justice must be read<br \/>\ninto unoccupied interstices of the statute unless there is a clear mandate to the contrary.<br \/>\nSuch power is inherent in every Tribunal, judicial or quasi-judicial character and the<br \/>\npurpose is to avoid miscarriage of justice. In the case of Basanta Kumar Sahoo v.<br \/>\nThe State of Orissa and others, reported in 1990 (II) OLR 408 while dealing with the<br \/>\ncase under the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976, the Court held that<br \/>\nwhere valuable right is sought to be taken away, an opportunity of hearing though not<br \/>\nspecifically provided in the Act, is desirable to be given. In the case of Kanak Cement<br \/>\nPvt. Ltd. V. Sales Tax Officer, Assessment Unit, Rajgangpur, reported in (1997)<br \/>\nVol.105 Sales Tax Cases 112, the Court observed that it is a fundamental requirement<br \/>\nof the principles of natural justice that if any person is likely to be affected by the use of<br \/>\nany material collected by the Revenue, those are to be brought to his notice, and<br \/>\ndisclosed to him. The requirement of natural justice is to disclose by way of<br \/>\nconfrontation the materials collected and proposed to be used against a dealer.\n<\/p>\n<p>       Admitted in the Act and the Rules, though there is no provision for affording an<br \/>\nopportunity of hearing before an order of suspension is passed, the said principle of<br \/>\nnatural justice has also not been expressly excluded.\n<\/p>\n<p>7. On reading of above judgments, it is clear that even in respect of suspension of<br \/>\nregistration certificate, civil consequence follows and therefore, observance of principle<br \/>\nof natural justice is a necessity. We are, therefore, of the view that even though the<br \/>\nstatute is silent about issuance of a notice to show cause prior to passing of an order of<br \/>\nsuspension under Section 30 of the Act, when such order of suspension results in civil<br \/>\nconsequences, the principles of natural justice should be followed. We are, therefore, of<br \/>\nthe view that the order of suspension of registration certificate is liable to be quashed<br \/>\neven though it is open for the petitioner under the Act to seek for restoration of the<br \/>\nsame.\n<\/p>\n<p>8.       Another submission was made by the learned counsel appearing for the<br \/>\nDepartment that if the order of suspension is quashed, the petitioner is likely to get<br \/>\ninvolved in such activities for which his registration had been put under suspension. In<br \/>\norder to avoid such a situation, we dispose of this writ application with the following<br \/>\ndirection:\n<\/p>\n<p>         The order of suspension in Annexure-2 is quashed and it will be open for the<br \/>\nDepartment to proceed under Section 30 of the Act after giving an opportunity of hearing<br \/>\nto the petitioner to meet the allegations contained in Annexure-1. In the event, such<br \/>\naction is taken by the Department, till an order is passed under Section 30 of the Act, the<br \/>\npetitioner shall be permitted to run its business subject to the condition that the same<br \/>\nshall be done under the supervision of an Officer of the opposite party-Department and<br \/>\nevery day transaction shall be intimated to the Department through the Officer who may<br \/>\nbe deputed to supervise the same.\n<\/p>\n<p>                                                          Writ petition allowed.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Orissa High Court M\/S. Sponge Udyot Pvt. Ltd vs Unknown on 8 April, 2010 L.MOHAPATRA, J &amp; B.P.RAY, J. W.P.(C). No.6567 OF 2010 ( Decided on 08 04. 2010.) M\/S. SPONGE UDYOT PVT. LTD. &#8230;&#8230;&#8230;.petitioner -V- THE ASST.COMMISSIONER OF SALES TAX, &#8230;&#8230;&#8230;..Opp.Party ROUTKELA-II CIRCLE, ROURKELA. ORISSA VALUE ADDED TAX ACT, 2004 (ACT NO. 4 OF [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,25],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-196861","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-orissa-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>M\/S. Sponge Udyot Pvt. Ltd vs Unknown on 8 April, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-sponge-udyot-pvt-ltd-vs-unknown-on-8-april-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"M\/S. Sponge Udyot Pvt. Ltd vs Unknown on 8 April, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-sponge-udyot-pvt-ltd-vs-unknown-on-8-april-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2010-04-07T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-12-17T05:10:44+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"8 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-sponge-udyot-pvt-ltd-vs-unknown-on-8-april-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-sponge-udyot-pvt-ltd-vs-unknown-on-8-april-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"M\\\/S. Sponge Udyot Pvt. Ltd vs Unknown on 8 April, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-04-07T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-12-17T05:10:44+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-sponge-udyot-pvt-ltd-vs-unknown-on-8-april-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1671,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Orissa High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-sponge-udyot-pvt-ltd-vs-unknown-on-8-april-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-sponge-udyot-pvt-ltd-vs-unknown-on-8-april-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-sponge-udyot-pvt-ltd-vs-unknown-on-8-april-2010\",\"name\":\"M\\\/S. Sponge Udyot Pvt. Ltd vs Unknown on 8 April, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-04-07T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-12-17T05:10:44+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-sponge-udyot-pvt-ltd-vs-unknown-on-8-april-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-sponge-udyot-pvt-ltd-vs-unknown-on-8-april-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ms-sponge-udyot-pvt-ltd-vs-unknown-on-8-april-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"M\\\/S. Sponge Udyot Pvt. Ltd vs Unknown on 8 April, 2010\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"M\/S. Sponge Udyot Pvt. Ltd vs Unknown on 8 April, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-sponge-udyot-pvt-ltd-vs-unknown-on-8-april-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"M\/S. Sponge Udyot Pvt. Ltd vs Unknown on 8 April, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-sponge-udyot-pvt-ltd-vs-unknown-on-8-april-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-04-07T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-12-17T05:10:44+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"8 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-sponge-udyot-pvt-ltd-vs-unknown-on-8-april-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-sponge-udyot-pvt-ltd-vs-unknown-on-8-april-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"M\/S. Sponge Udyot Pvt. Ltd vs Unknown on 8 April, 2010","datePublished":"2010-04-07T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-12-17T05:10:44+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-sponge-udyot-pvt-ltd-vs-unknown-on-8-april-2010"},"wordCount":1671,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Orissa High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-sponge-udyot-pvt-ltd-vs-unknown-on-8-april-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-sponge-udyot-pvt-ltd-vs-unknown-on-8-april-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-sponge-udyot-pvt-ltd-vs-unknown-on-8-april-2010","name":"M\/S. Sponge Udyot Pvt. Ltd vs Unknown on 8 April, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-04-07T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-12-17T05:10:44+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-sponge-udyot-pvt-ltd-vs-unknown-on-8-april-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-sponge-udyot-pvt-ltd-vs-unknown-on-8-april-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ms-sponge-udyot-pvt-ltd-vs-unknown-on-8-april-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"M\/S. Sponge Udyot Pvt. Ltd vs Unknown on 8 April, 2010"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/196861","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=196861"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/196861\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=196861"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=196861"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=196861"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}