Orissa Court January 1952 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Bala Krishna Kar Vs. Ganesh Prasad Bhagat and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-29-1952
Reported in: AIR1952Ori203
Panigrahi, J. 1. These two consolidated appeals arise out of two suits tried together by the Subordinate Judge, Cuttack, and are covered by the same judgment. Title Suit No. 32 of 1944 was filed by Ganesh Prasad Bhagat and others (hereinafter referred to as the plaintiffs) against the appellant, as representing the public, for a declaration that the suit temple of Baldev Jieu and the endowments connected therewith, in Jaginipur Zamindari, are the private 'Devotter' properties of the plaintiffs and thati the order passed by the Commissioner of Hindu Religious Endowments, under Sub-section (2) of Section 64 of the Orissa Hindu Religious Endowments Act. 1939 (Orissa Act IV (4) of 1939) declaring the said temple to be an 'excepted temple' Is wrong.Title Suit No. 11 of 1945 is a representative suit filed by Balakrushna Kar, the appellant before us, on behalf of the general public, against the Bhagatas, plaintiffs in Title Suit No. 32 of 1944, for a declaration that the suit temple and its e...
Gobinda Prasad Bhagat Vs. Ram Prasad Bhagat and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-25-1952
Reported in: AIR1953Ori152
ORDERPanigrahi, J.1. The petitioner, who was the complainant in the lower Court, has obtained a rule calling upon the Magistrate (Sri A.K. Palit, Magistrate, 2nd Class) to show cause why his order acquitting the accused persons should not be set aside.2. The petitioner filed a complaint under Sections 323 and 379, Penal Code, alleging that he had been relieved of a sum of Rs. 250/- by the accused persons and assaulted in his sister's house when he was about to go to his lawyer. The accused persons were put on trial and some witnesses were examined before charge. On the evidence so far recorded, the Court framed charge under Sections 323 and 379, and the case stood posted for further cross-examination on 27-7-51. On that day, the complainant and the two prosecution witnesses were absent. Three other prosecution witnesses were present. The defence wanted to cross-examine the complainant before cross-examining his witnesses. As the complainant and two other prosecution witnesses were not ...
State Vs. Sankar Charan Sahu and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-24-1952
Reported in: AIR1952Ori215; 18(1952)CLT75
Narasimham, J.1. These proceedings relate to contempt of the Court of the Additional Munsiff of Cuttack alleged to have been committed by Shri S. S. Roy, a 1st Class Magistrate, and by Sri Sankar Charan Sahu, a Sub-inspector of Police. Original Criminal Miscellaneous Case No. 11 of 1951 was started on the basis of a report submitted to this Court by the Additional Munsiff of Cuttack Sri B. K. Das. Original Criminal Miscellaneous Case No. 14 of 1951 was started on a petition filed before this Court by M. S. Rao, a Senior Advocate of this Court. Both the cases refer to the same incident and consequently they have been heard analogously and will be governed by the same order.2. Mr. M. S. Rao had obtained a decree in 1935 against one Hrudananda Sahu and the execution of that decree was pending in the Court of the Additional Munsiff (Second Munsiff) of Cuttack in Execution Case No. 18/258 of 1948/46. In that execution case a warrant of arrest under Order 21, Rule 18, C.P.C., was issued agai...
Sri Rama Chandra Mardaraj Deo Vs. Collector of Agricultural Income-tax
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-17-1952
Reported in: AIR1952Ori281; [1952]22ITR220(Orissa)
Narasimham, J.1. This is an application under Sub-section (3) of Section 29 of the Orissa Agricultural Income-Tax Act, 1947 against an order of the Revenue Commissioner refusing, to state a case for the decision of the High Court in respect of the assessment of the petitioner of agricultural income-tax for the year 1947-48.2. The petitioner is the proprietor of the impartible estates of Khallikote, Ataganda and Biridhi. On 26-5-49, the Agricultural Income-Tax officer of Ganjam made an assessment on the total agricultural income of the petitioner for the year 1947-48 as estimated by him. Against that order, the petitioner filed an appeal under Section 25 of the Act before the Collector of Agricultural Income-Tax, Orissa, who dismissed the appeal and confirmed the assessment on the 6th March, 1950. The petitioner then filed a revision petition under Section 23of the Act before the Revenue Commissioner who rejected this petition. Then he applied to him under Sub-section (2) of Section 29 ...
Prosecuting Inspector Vs. Minaketan Mahato and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-11-1952
Reported in: AIR1952Ori350
ORDERNarasimham, J. 1. This is a reference by the Addl. District Magistrate, Keonjhar, against an order passed by a First Class Magistrate of Keonjhar in a commitment proceeding under section 302, Indian Penal Code, against the opposite party.2. The local Police, after usual investigation, submitted charge-sheet against the opposite party under section 302, I. P. C. on 30-3-51. TheSub Divisional Magistrate of Sadar, Keonjhar transferred the case to Mr. K. K. Bannerji, Magistrate, First Class. That Magistrate, after 2 or 3 adjournments, took up the case on 21-5-51 for enquiry under Chapter XVIII of the Criminal Procedure Code. But on that date, though 7 prosecution witnesses were present, the Prosecuting Inspector filed a petition for adjournment saying that the investigation of the case had to be reopened and some other witnesses examined. He also prayed for permission to be accorded to the Investigating Officer to make further investigation into the case. The Investigating Officer als...
The State Vs. the Editors and Publishers of Eastern Times and Prajatan ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-07-1952
Reported in: AIR1952Ori318
Jagannadhadas, C.J.1. These four proceedings arise out of rules issued against certain persons for having committed contempt of this Court by publication of certain news items and articles in newspapers. To elucidate the background of these proceedings, it is necessary to state a few preliminary facts.2. In the month of April, 1951, there were examinations held at Cuttack by the Utkal University for the 'M. B. B. S. degree. These proceedings arise out of examinations for the 1st year M. B.B. S. students. The Board of Examiners submitted their results to the Syndicate on the 21st of April. The Vice-Chancellor of the University had information two days earlier, that is on the 19th April, that some questions in the written paper for the examination in Anatomy of the said 1st M.B.B.S. held on the 9th April, had leaked out. At a meeting of the Syndicate on the 21st April, the inform-mation received about the leakage of the question in the written Anatomy paper was considered by the Syndicat...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›