Skip to content

Orissa Court March 1953 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.

Mar 26 1953

Bijoyananda Patnaik Vs. Balakrushna Kar and anr.

Court: Orissa

Decided on: Mar-26-1953

Reported in: AIR1953Ori249

Panigrahi, C.J.1. These proceedings incontempt have been initiated at the instance of the petitioner Sri Bijoyananda Patnaik, who is the Chairman of the Board of Directors of Messrs. Eastern Mercantile Corporation, Ltd. Opposite Party 1 is the Editor of an Oriya newspaper called 'Matrubhumi' and opposite party2 is its printer and publisher. On 14-6-1952 the business premises of the petitioner were searched by an Inspector of the Special Police Establishment, Government of India, Delhi, under a warrant issued by the Additional District Magistrate, Cuttack, for the recovery of certain documents and letters exchanged between the petitioners and some overseas suppliers, in respect of a license issued by the Government of India for the import of bicycles intended for internal consumption within Orissa State. On 21-6-52 the petitioner moved this Court in Original Judicial Case No. 18 of 1952 praying for the issue of a rule on the Additional District Magistrate and the Inspector, Special Poli...


Mar 18 1953

Sidheswar Panda Vs. the State

Court: Orissa

Decided on: Mar-18-1953

Reported in: AIR1954Ori16; 19(1953)CLT263

ORDERPanigrahi, C.J.1. The petitioner has been convicted under Rule 97 of the Hindol Forest Rules read with Section 26 (f) and (g), Forest Act and sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 50/- in default to undergo R. I. for one week. The facts proved against him in brief are that he was found in possession of 31 pieces of sal timber on 17-7-51. The forester Paramananda Das suspected that these might have been removed from the Government forest and demanded the production of permit from the accused. The accused said that he had got the timber logs from one Mr. Naylor under a permit and that the logs had borne hammer marks. No permit was produced and the prosecution evidence is that there were no hammer marks. On these facts, the petitioner, along with 4 others, was prosecuted for a forest-offence but the other persons have been acquitted by the Magistrate and the petitioner alone was found guilty of being in possession of forest produce without a permit.2. The trial court itself remarks 'there i...


Mar 11 1953

Jagannath Das Vs. Nagendra Jena

Court: Orissa

Decided on: Mar-11-1953

Reported in: AIR1953Ori246; 19(1953)CLT208

Narasimham, J.1. This second appeal is by the plaintiff against the appellate judgment of the Additional Subordinate Judge, Cuttack, reversing the judgment of the 2nd Munsif of Cuttack and dismissing his suit for ejectment of the respondent-defendant from a house while decreeing his suit for arrears of rent. The second appeal was first heard by a Single Judge of this Court who, however, referred it to a Division Bench in view of some observations in -- 'Banchhanidhi Samantari v. Lachminarain Agarwala', AIR 1950 Orissa 1 (A) regarding the construction of Clause (a) of Section 5, Orissa House Rent Control Act, 1947.2. The appellant is the owner of a house in Balubazar, Cuttack town, and the respondent was a monthly tenant of the appellant residing in the house. The appellant, alleging that the rent due for the house was not paid from July, 1943 till the end of April, 1946, sent a registered notice on 23-1-46 terminating his tenancy and then instituted a suit for his ejectment and also fo...


Mar 11 1953

Orient Fast Colour Dye Works Vs. Commr. of Income-tax

Court: Orissa

Decided on: Mar-11-1953

Reported in: AIR1953Ori79

Panigrahi, J. 1. The petitioners, Messrs. The Orient Fast Colour Dye Works, are a firm carrying on business in dyeing yarn. In assessing the net profits of the firm for the assessment year 1947-48 deduction of a sum of Rs. 5686/-/-was claimed on the ground that it represented the remuneration paid to Messrs. Nikunjakishore Das and Dhananjoy Lenka, two of the partners of the firm, for carrying on the business of partnership. The Income-tax Officer disallowed the claim, included the sum in the net profits and assessed the same to income-tax. 2. The case for the petitioners is that the management of the firm's business was entrusted to another firm known as Friends United Agency, said to have been constituted the managing agents of the Orient Past Colour Works. It was also alleged that Messrs Nikunjakishore Das and Dhanan-joy Lenka are partners in the firm of Friends United Agency. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner found that M/s. Friends United Agency did not in fact conduct the busin...


Mar 11 1953

Narendra Chandra Pradhan Vs. Raghu Rout and ors.

Court: Orissa

Decided on: Mar-11-1953

Reported in: AIR1953Ori313; 19(1953)CLT432

Panigrahi, J. 1. This is a petition under Article 227 of the Constitution seeking to revise the order of an Election Tribunal refusing to set aside the election of opposite party No. 1. The petitioner and 4 others were candidates tor election as Commissioner of the Cuttack Municipality from Ward No. XVII. Opposite party No. 1 was declared elected having secured the largest number of votes. The petitioner's case is that opposite party No. 2 Bishnu Charan Mukherji was disqualified for standing as a Councillor and that the Election Officer improperly accepted his nomination paper. It is contended that if this irregularity had not been committed by the Returning Officer, the petitioner would have secured the largest number of votes and would have been elected. The petitioner, therefore, prayed that the election of the opposite party No. 1 may be set aside and that he himself be declared elected.2. The Election Tribunal held that opposite party No. 2 was disqualified on the date f his nomin...


Mar 10 1953

imdad Ali Khan and ors. Vs. Sardar Khan and ors.

Court: Orissa

Decided on: Mar-10-1953

Reported in: AIR1954Ori15; 19(1953)CLT307

Mohapatra, J. 1. This is a defendants' First Appeal against the judgment dated 10-12-1947, of Sri C. C. Coari, District Judge, of Cuttack in a suit brought under Section 92, Civil P.C., by 3 Mahommedans representing the public for the reliefs of removing the defendants from the mutwalliship of the endowment alleged to be a public endowment and of settling a scheme for the management of the affairs of the alleged endowment. Defendants 2 and 3 are minors represented by their father defendant 1. The grounds for removal of the defendants from the mutwalliship and for settlement of a scheme are that the defendants have committed several acts of maladministration and mismanagement of the affairs of the mosque and the properties attached to it with an area of 10.25 acres of land which were also endowed to the mosque.2. The defence, in short, is that the ancestors of the defendants had constructed the mosque and another nearer ancestor of the defendants also made an endowment of the aforesaid ...


Mar 10 1953

Fakir Upadhya Vs. Padmalav Mohanty

Court: Orissa

Decided on: Mar-10-1953

Reported in: AIR1953Ori337; 19(1953)CLT304

ORDERMohapatra, J.1. This is a civil revision against an order of the lower appellate Court who had set aside the judgment of the trial Court in appeal under Section 476-B, Criminal P. C. The present petitioner was the defendant in the money Suit No. 407 of 1951 in the Court of the Munsif, Puri, brought by the plaintiff, who is opposite party in this revision. The suit was based upon a receipt purported to contain thumb impression and the signature of the defendant the present petitioner. The defence taken was that the receipt was a forged document and the transaction is mala fide. Prior to the case being heard, the plaintiff made default and allowed the case to be dismissed. The defendant having put in a petition under Section 476, Criminal P. C. for holding an enquiry against the plaintiff for offences under Ss. 209, 465 and 471, Penal Code, the trial Court ordered a complaint to be filed. The lower appellate Court, however, has set aside the order of the trial Court on the main grou...


  • ‹ Prev
  • Next ›

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial