Orissa Court September 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.
Anam SwaIn and ors. Vs. State
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-19-1952
Reported in: AIR1954Ori33; 19(1953)CLT14
Panigrahi, J. 1. This is a reference made under Section 397, Criminal P. C., by the Additional Sessions Judge, Cuttack, recommending that the unanimous verdict of 'guilty' returned by the Jury, in respect of a charge under Section 376, I. P. C., should be set aside.2. The prosecution case, briefly, is this. On the night of 12-2-1951, P.W. 7 Bimali Dei, an unmarried girl was sleeping in her house in village Patkura in P. S. Tikhiri of Cuttack district, with her mother (P.W. 5), her sister (P.W. 6) and her younger brothers. At midnight she was carried away by some persons who made a forcible entry into the house, and was carried- to a field about, 600 yards away from her house and there she was raped by the four accused persons. After she had been raped twice by each of the accused persons, she was brought by them and left in the backyard (bari) of her house in a prostrate condition. Meanwhile her mother and sister had been aroused by the cries of a young baby and P.W. 5 called out P.W. ...
Brundaban Chandra Dhir Narendra Vs. the State of Orissa in the Revenue ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-19-1952
Reported in: AIR1953Ori121
Jagannadhadas, C.J.1. This is an application under Article 226 of the Constitution by the petitioner who is the proprietor of Madhupur Estate in Cuttack district, against the State of Orissa and the Court of Wards of the Orissa State, as well as against the Deputy Collector in charge of the Wards Estate. The State Government by virtue of the powers conferred on it under Section 16, Orissa Court of Wards Act, 1947, issued notification No. 9876/R dated the 7th December 1951, in the Revenue Department declaring the petitioner a disqualified proprietor under Section 10 (f) (iv) of the said Act and published the same in the Orissa Gazette in accordance with the provision of Section 21 of the Act. The Court of Wards assumed superintendence of the Madhupur Estate by virtue of the said notification on the 8th December 1951. Since then, the Estate has been under the management of the Court of Wards. The petitioner has accordingly come forward with this application dated the 5th March 1952, chal...
The State Vs. Somnath Mahpatra, Secretary to the Govt. of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-10-1952
Reported in: AIR1953Ori33; 19(1953)CLT58
Jagannadha Das, C.J. 1. This is a proceeding in contempt against Sri Somanath. Mohapatra, I.A.S., Secretary to the Government of Orissa, Home Department. The circumstances under which this proceeding was initiated have been started in our judgment in -- 'Shyamaghana Ray v. State', Cr. Misc. Nos. 195, 196, 200, 202, 204, and 207 of 1951, dated 26th February 1952, and need not be recapitulated in detail. Briefly stated, they are as follows : One Govind Pradhan was under detention by an order of the local Government the validity of which was challenged before this court. This Court by its order dated 26th November 1951, directed his release. On the 27th November 1951, another order of detention enuring for three months, that is till the 27th February 1952, was passed by the District Magistrate, Ganjam. Having been re-arrested thereunder, he applied to this Court again challenging the validity of the fresh order of detention. That application which was Cr. Misc. Petn. No. 189/51, was heard...
BasiruddIn and anr. Vs. Collector of Sundergarh and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-09-1952
Reported in: AIR1953Ori42; 19(1953)CLT251
Panigrahi, J. 1. The petitioners and (are?) the recorded tenants of about 103 acres of land in Mouza Liploi, P. S. Raj-Gangpur in the district of Sundergarh. For the purpose of starting a cement factory. Government acquired about 70 acres out of plots 421 and 83/735 belonging to the petitioners, under the Orissa Development of Industries, Irrigation, Agriculture, Capital Construction and Resettlement of Displaced Persons (Land Acquisition) Act, 1948 (Orissa Act 18 of 1948) and published a Notification to that effect under Section 3(1) of the Act. The petitioners objected to the acquisition and filed their statement under Section 6 of the Act. Their case was that they purchased these lands by an oral sale in their favour made by one Budhu Kumbhar, father of opposite parties 2 and 3 and the father-in-law of opposite party 4 and that they were recorded as tenants in the Record of Rights prepared in the year 1932-33.It appears that on 12-2-1951 the opposite parties 2 to 4 filed an objectio...
Lachminarayan Modi Vs. Commr. of Income Tax
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-09-1952
Reported in: AIR1952Ori354; 19(1953)CLT269
Mohapatra, J. 1. This is a reference under Section 66 (1) of the Indian Income-tax Act made by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Bombay Branch. The assessee is an undivided Hindu family represented by Lachminarayan Modi, the Karta of the said family. Lachminarayan has four brothers who separated long ago. The assessee family carried business mainly in salt and in other articles, such as, Kerosene Oil, Petrol &c.; The Head Office was in Cuttack, and there were branches also in Ichhapur, Ganjam &c.; In Ichhapur, the Firm, known as Tilakchand Hariram, carried on business in manufacture of salt, the partners in the business being Lachminarayan, the 'Karta' of the assessee family, and his divided brothers.Owing to differences between the partners, Lachminarayan brought Original Suit No. 6 of 1941 in the Court of the Subordinate Judge of Cuttack against his four brothers, the other partners in the partnership business, praying for a declaration that the partnership stood dissolved since 31-...
Purna Chandra Mahanty and ors. Vs. Samanta Radhaprasana Das
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-08-1952
Reported in: AIR1953Ori46
Jagannadhadas, C.J. 1. This is an application for transfer of original suit No. 588/50 from the Court of the Subordinate Judge of Balasore, to the Court of the Subordinate Judge of Cuttack, to be tried and disposed of along with original suit No. 59/50 pending in the latter Court. For the sake of convenience, one may be called the Balasore suit and the other as the Cuttack suit. The Cuttack suit was filed on 18-8-1950, and the Balasore suit is said to have been filed somewhat later.2. The trial of both the suits has been stayed by orders of this Court dated 5-11-51 and 13-2-52. It is stated that the trial in both the suits has not yet commenced.3. It is necessary to state briefly the admitted facts and the allegations in each, in order to appreciate the grounds on which this application for the transfer of the Balasore suit to Cuttack and for the joint trial of both together has been made. The plaintiff in the Cuttack suit, Srimati Snehalata Dei is the wife of the defendant therein Sri...
Sm. Snehalata Devi Vs. Samanta Radha Prasanna Das
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-05-1952
Reported in: AIR1953Ori25; 19(1953)CLT1
Jagannadhadas, C.J.1. This suit comes up to us by withdrawal from the Court of Sub-Judge, Cuttack, for a decision on the preliminary issue raised therein as regards jurisdiction. The suit was filed in the court of the Subordinate Judge at Cuttack and thedefendant has taken an objection that the Cuttack Sub-Court has no local jurisdiction over the suit. A preliminary decision of this issue has been found necessary as incidental to the disposal of the application M.J.C. 164/51 that came up before us. That was an application for transfer of another suit at Balasore to be tried along with suit at Cuttack. In the course of the arguments on that application, a point was rightly taken on behalf of the respondent therein that it would be futile toconsider the question of transfer of the Balasore suit to be tried with the Cuttack-suit if ultimately it is found that the Cuttack-suit was not maintainable on the ground of local jurisdiction.It may be mentioned that during the earlier stages of the...
Pakala Narayan Rao Naidu and ors. Vs. Gurunath Padhi and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-03-1952
Reported in: AIR1953Ori3; 19(1953)CLT81
Narasimham, J. 1. This is an appeal against an order of the Subordinate Judge of Berhampur scaling down the decretal amount payable by the respondents-judgment-debtors to the appellants-decree-holders, in exercise of the powers conferred by Section 10 of the Orissa Money Lenders Act.2. The original loan that was advanced to the respondents' predecessor-in-interest was only Rs. 2,000 based on two promissory notes for Rs. 1,000 each dated 1-9-28 and 5-10-28. In due course, fresh promissory notes for the principal and interest due were executed by the debtor on 1-9-31 and 21-7-34. The last promissory note was for a sum of Rs. 3,647-3-4. Two payments of Rs. 100 on 19-7-37 and Rs. 800 on 12-7-40 were made by the debtor and then the creditor instituted a suit (O. S. 48 of 1942) in the Court of the Subordinate Judge, Berhampur for the realisation of the balance of the debt with interest. The suit was eventually compromised and a compromise decree for Rs. 7,000 was passed directing the payment...
Krishna Chandra Sahani Vs. Anem Peda Siva Paravatamma
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-03-1952
Reported in: AIR1953Ori13; 19(1953)CLT168
Mohapatra, J.1. This appeal of the judgment-debtor No. 6, arising put of an execution proceeding, is against the judgment of Sri R. C. Misra, Subordinate Judge of Berhampur, rejecting his petition under Section 47, Civil Procedure Code, taking up an objection of limitation. The decree, under execution, is a mortgage decree, the preliminary decree being dated 7-1-32 and the final decree being dated 2-11-32. The present execution petition was filed on 11-9-45, clearly beyond 12 years from the date of the final decree.2. The original decree-holder was one Anem Tatayya. He had two sons, Anem Basanna and Anem Narasimhulu. Anem Narasimhulu is alive and has transferred his share in the decree to the 6th judgment-debtor, Krisna Chandra Sahani. Anem Basanna having died, his widow, Anem Peda Siva Paravatamma, has filed the present execution petition. Judgment-debtors 1 to 5 have no more interest inasmuch as they have sold their interest in the mortgage property and the sale proceeds have been pa...
K.J.B. David Vs. Nilamoni Devi
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-02-1952
Reported in: AIR1953Ori10; 19(1953)CLT34
Narasimham, J.1. This revision is against an order passed by the Subdivisional Magistrate of Berhampur under Section 438, Cr. P. C. directing the petitioner to pay Rs. 35/- per month towards maintenance of the opposite party who was said to be his legally married wife.2. The parties are residents of Berhampur town and the petitioner is a Government servant employed as an Inspector of Co-operative Societies. He is an Oriya Christian. The opposite party also claimed to be a Christian though she admitted that she was not baptised. She is the daughter of one Shyamsundar Mohanty (deceased), an Advocate of Berhampur Bar, through one Krishnabeni (P. W. 2) who is the daughter of one Chintala Ramaswami Naidu. The religion of the parents of the opposite party was not brought out in evidence; but there is evidence to show that two elder sisters of the opposite party were married under Christian rites in the local Church. It was further alleged that the opposite party (Nilamom) was married to the ...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›