Orissa Court January 1949 Judgments
Duryodhan Kar and anr. Vs. Brajasunder Deb, After His Death Raja Chand ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-28-1949
Reported in: AIR1949Ori31
Ray, C.J.1. It is defendants appeal in a suit for ejectment by the respondent-landlord. The disputed lands had been divided into two different schedules 'Ka' and 'Kha. 'Ka' schedule, lands were recorded in the revisional settlement survey as patadoraghena. In the column for rent, Rs. 4-7-11 pies were stated to be the rent, but down below IB as. 11 pies were indicated to be the ghenanjama. The selfsame holding came to be recorded in what is known as current, settlement record of rights as occupancy holding of defendant 1 and widow of his brother, deceased Ghana Ear. The rent payable in respect of this holding was shown at Rs. 4-8-0 substantially the same as the rent shown in the. rentcolumn of the revisional survey. The local case in the current settlement was shown as 2 as. 3 pies. The area of this holding is 3 acres and 66 decimals Schedule 'Kha' land has been recorded in both the settlements as 'madhyasa-twadhikari' (tenure). In the revisional survey, there were the additional words ...
Tag this Judgment!Gobinda Kar and anr. Vs. Mohan Maharana and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-27-1949
Reported in: AIR1949Ori18
Ray, C.J.1. It is plaintiffs' second appeal in a suit for declaration of title and recovery of possession of the disputed 4 acres of lands said to have been purchased by him from defendant 12 on 10th July 1948. Besides, he claims mesne profits of Rs. 216-8-0 for having been unlawfully kept out of possession by defendants 1 to 11. Defendant 12, the plaintiffs' vendor, on his part had acquired the properties by a sale-deed dated 13th May 1938 executed by Gourang (father of defendant 3), Mohan, defendant 1, Baji (father of defendants 4 and 5) and Arjuna (defendant 2), who at the time along with certain other members, who are defendants in the case, constituted a Hindu Mitaksbara joint family. Defendants 1 to 11 contested the suit on the ground that the transaction represented by the sale-deed in favour of defendant 12 was a fictitious one, it having been intended by the parties to execute a banami document. Besides, defendants 3 to 11 raised further plea that in case the plea of benami fa...
Tag this Judgment!Banchhanidhi Samantrai Vs. LachminaraIn Agarwala
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-25-1949
Reported in: AIR1950Ori250
Panigrahi, J.1. This is a second appeal by the tenant against whom a decree for ejectment has been passed in a suit by the respondent-plaintiff. The plaintiff's case was that the defendant was let into his house as a monthly tenant on a monthly rent of Rs. 14, bat that the defendant was highly irregular in the payment of rent necessitating the filing of two suits by the plaintiff, to recover arrears of rent. The defendant again fell into arrears and the plaintiff was, therefore, obliged to terminate the tenancyby the service of a notice to quit on the defendant. The defendant refused to accept the noticeand hence the, suit. The defendant's plea wasthat he is protected against eviction by theprovisions of the House Rent Control Order andthat he was willing to pay up all the arrears ofrent. He also questioned the validity of thenotice to quit and denied his liability to paydamages. 2. The Corts below have concurrently found that the notice served on the defendant to quit, terminating the...
Tag this Judgment!Sm. Oshashashi Dei Vs. Petei Dei and and After Death, Khandei Dei and ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-24-1949
Reported in: AIR1949Ori29
Ray, C.J.1. This is a defendant's second appeal in a suit for declaration of-title and recovery of possession of Section 70 acres of land said to have been inherited by the plaintiff from her deceased husband (Dhruba) but now possessed, by the defendant by virtue of delivery of possession given by the rent execution Court at Jaipur on the strength of an auction purchase which took place some time in the year 1987. The delivery of possession is dated 28th November 1987 and the present suit commenced on 16th July 1943.2. In order to appreciate the questions raised, it is necessary to state certain facts. The disputed lands 'constituted one occupancy holding which was the ancestral property of the plaintiff's husband (Dhruba) and his brother (Brundaban). Both the brothers were in joint occupation of the same till they separated and divided the family property some time about 50 years before the suit. It is alleged by the plaintiff that in that family partition the disputed lands fell comp...
Tag this Judgment!Giridhari Mohanty Vs. Abdul Khan and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-20-1949
Reported in: AIR1951Ori41
Ray, C.J.1. It is a defendant 1's appeal in a suit for declaration of title and recovery of possession of the disputed property which constitutes an occupancy holding in Touzi No. 3019 in the district of Cuttack. Defendant 5 was the original owner of the occupancy holding. He had usufructorily mortgaged the same to defendent 2 and father of defendant 3 who were recorded mortgagees. Ultimately, defendants 6 to 9 purchased the holding in execution of the mortgage decree before 1938. An ex parte decree in a rent suit was obtained against the recorded tenants on 27-8-1941. The decree was put into execution on 3-1-1941 in which an order to issue attachment against the holding was passed on 4-4-1941. The attachment was effected on 30-4- 1941. Before effectuation of the attachment and after the commencement of the execution, that is, on 25-4-1941, the plaintiff purchased the holding and it can be premised without any controversy that by such purchase he acquired the right of occupancy and all...
Tag this Judgment!Bira Naik and anr. Vs. Mahanta Sidhakamal Nayan Ramanuj Das
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-17-1949
Reported in: AIR1951Ori300
Ray, C.J.1. This is a pltf's appeal in a suit for recovery of possession or in the alternative for redemption of the disputed properties which have been mortgaged as a simple mtge. on 13-9-1913. The disputed lands are 19.87 acres of which 15.44 are tenanted & the rest are Khasdakhali lands. During the subsistence of the mtge. the deft, came into possession of the disputed lands under the provisions of Section 225, Orissa Tenancy Act, Binoe 27.11-1934. The present suit was instituted on 19.11-1943 with the prayer that the debt with interest at 12 1/2 p.c. p.a, that accrued due under Schedule 25 & the mtge. dues under the simple mtge. had been discharged by the date of the institution of the suit & that the pltf. was entitled to recover the properties from the deft, free of previous simple mtge. as well as of the charge created under Schedule 25. The alternative relief of the pltf. was that in case the mtge. still existed & the mtge. money or any part of it was still due he may be allowe...
Tag this Judgment!Akshoya Kumar Das and ors. Vs. Jagadish Misra and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-10-1949
Reported in: AIR1949Ori56
Ray, C.J.1. This second appeal is by defendants 3 and 4, the landlord auction purchasers of an occupancy holding in execution of a rents decree obtained by them, in a suit for enforcement of a mortgage executed by the occupancy ryot on 18th May 1929 in favour of the plaintiff. The plaintiff's suit, filed on 15th June 1942, seeks to enforce the mortgage not only against the mortgagor or his successors-in-interest but also the landlord-auction-purchasers mentioned above.2. The defence of the appellants is that they possess a superior right in respect of the occupancy holding and their purchase is free from mortgage. This contention is based upon two grounds: (i) that they are the sole landlords of the occupancy holding which was non-transferable at the time when this mortgage was executed and as such is not binding against them nor can it affect the interest acquired by them at the execution sale ; and (ii) that they have, by recourse to legitimate measures prescribed in Section 221, Ori...
Tag this Judgment!Krishna Chandra Gajapati Narayan Deo Vs. Rokkam Venkatapparao Dora
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-10-1949
Reported in: AIR1951Ori268
Narasimham, J.1. This is the pltf's second appeal against the order of the Dist. J. of Ganjam Pun reversing She decision of the Special Deputy Collector, Chicacole Division & dismissing the phtf's suit; for recovery of arrears of rent for the three Fasli years 1342 to 1844.2. This litigation has had a chequered career. The pltf's suit was brought in 1936 & it was first dismissed by the then Deputy Collector on 27-10-1937 in S. S. NO. 782 of 1936. On appeal, the Dist. J. set aside the order of dismissal & remanded the suit for fresh disposal. The suit was then heard by a Special Deputy Collector who decreed the claim. On appeal, the learned Diat. J. revsd. the decision of the Special Deputy Collector & dismissed the suit. There upon, the pltf. preferred a second appeal to the Hon'ble H. C. who directed the rehearing of the appeal by the Dist. J. on the ground that the lower appellate Ct. misconcieved the scope of the previous litigation between the parties in the year 1902. After remand...
Tag this Judgment!Bhagabat Charan Jena and ors. Vs. Ram Narayan Mohanty
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-05-1949
Reported in: AIR1951Ori271
Ray C.J.1. This is pltf's appeal in a suit for a declaration that the award passed by the Registrar, Co-operative Societies, is not binding: against them & for the consequential relief of restraining the society from executing the award against them.2. The pltfs. 2 & 3 are brothers & the pltfs. 1 & 4 to 1 are cousins of one Kali Charan Jena. In this appeal it is not controverted that they were members of a joint Hindu Mitakshara family with Kali Charan (deft. 2) at all material times. Kali Charan is a member of Routmandarini Co-operative Society of which deft. 1 (resp. 1) is the Secretary. Kali Charan, as a member, took a loan of Kb. 6C0 on 3-9 29 for the purpose of paying off Certain debts incurred for purchase of lands-a purpose recognised under the bye laws. In the Loan Register, he got certain persona as suraties, who undertook, the liability in case Kali Charan did not pay the loan to the Society. Ultimately, Kali Charan. not having been able to pay, there was a reference by the S...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›