Orissa Court September 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.
Chandrayya and ors. Vs. Member, Excise, Board of Revenue and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-29-1953
Reported in: AIR1954Ori74; 19(1953)CLT501
Mohapatra, J.(O. J. C. 46/53) 1. This is a petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India presented by the three petitioners with a prayer for issue of a writ of mandamus or any other direction that may be deemed at by this Court in the following circumstances:The licenses for the retail vend of country spirit at five places mentioned in the petition in the district of Koraput were put to auction for annual settlement by the Collector. One Upendra Senapati was granted license in respect of three places and one S. Narasimhulu in respect of the other two. The licenses were to expire on 31-3-53. For the year commencing on 1-4-53 the auction look place on 4-3-53 in respect of the above-mentioned five places for realising fees for the licenses for the retail vend of country spirit. The bid of petitioner 1 was accepted by the Collector for the licenses of three places and the bids of petitioners 2 and 3 in respect of each of the other two places were also accepted by the Collector and ...
Chandrabhanu Deb Vs. State of Orissa and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-28-1953
Reported in: AIR1954Ori127; 20(1954)CLT536
Narasimham, J.1. This is a petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution by the owner of Killa Aul for a declaration that the provisions of the Orissa Estates Abolition Act, 1951 (Orissa Act I of 1952) do not apply to Killa Aul and for other consequential reliefs.2. The petition was filed on 17-12-52 and in that petition the validity of the said Act was challenged on various grounds. These are very similar to those taken by the zamindars of Ganjam in -- 'Gajapati Narayana Deo v. State of Orissa', AIR 1953 Orissa 185 (A), which have been negatived by the Supreme Court on 29-5-1953, vide -- 'Gajapati Narayan Deo v. State of Orissa', AIR 1953 SC 375 (B). The limited question for consideration at present is whether Killa Aul is an 'estate' as defined in Section 2(g), Orissa Estates Abolition Act, and whether the petitioner is an 'Intermediary' as defined in Section 2(h) of that Act.3. In the suit brought by the Raja of Kanika -- 'O. S. No. 1 of 1953 (Orissa) (C), the same question has been d...
Radha Kamal Vs. Puri Municipality and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-23-1953
Reported in: AIR1954Ori110; 20(1954)CLT193
Panigrahi, C.J.1. This is a second appeal by the unsuccessful plaintiff who has lost his suit for specific performance in both the Courts below.2. The facts leading up to this litigation are briefly these. On 10-7-23 defendant No. 1, namely, the Municipality of Puri, granted a lease of 500 acres of land on the Beach Road to one Chandramoni Devi, the period for which the lease was to run being stipulated as twenty years. The lessee-assigned her leasehold interest by four different sale-deeds, to four different persons including the plaintiff, and his brother, Dr. Radha Kumud Mukherjee. Under these assignments the plaintiff and his brother, each acquired 120 acres of the entire lease-hold by virtue of two sale-deeds dated 26-5-1925. The other vendees from Chandramoni Devi were one Promode Sundari and one Amiya Nath Mukherjee.By an identure made on the 10th January 1944, defendant No. 1 granted a lease of the plot purchased by the plaintiff from Chandramoni Devi, to defendant No. 2, and b...
Damei Sethi and ors. Vs. Udi Behera
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-21-1953
Reported in: AIR1954Ori145; 20(1954)CLT308
Panigrahi, C.J.1. This is an application under Section 439, Criminal P.C. challenging the legality of an order of conviction passed by, Sri B.C. Patnaik, Magistrate, First Class with appellate powers, Cuttack. The petitioners were accused of having allowed their cattle to stray into the field of the complainant (P.W. 1) and damage his chilly crop. The complaint filed, by P.W. 1 was taken cognizance of by the Subdivisional Magistrate, who transferred it for trial to the file of Sri P. Tripathy, Magistrate, II Class, Cuttack. The Magistrate found that damage had been caused to the crop of the complainant (P.W. 1) by the cattle of the petitioners. He also found that the cattle were being led to the pound by P.W. 1 when the petitioners forcibly rescued them.The trying Magistrate was of opinion that these two facts were not sufficient to constitute the ingredients of an offence under Section 24, Cattle Trespass Act. He however convicted the petitioners under Section 426, I.P.C. and sentence...
Harekrishna Mahatab Vs. Balkrishna Kar and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-17-1953
Reported in: AIR1954Ori57; 19(1953)CLT452
Mohapatra, J.1. The present contempt proceedings were started on an application filed by Shri H.K. Mahatab who was the Chief Minister of the State of Orissa and thereafter a Union Minister in the Central Cabinet. He is at present a Member of the Parliament. The petition is against opposite party No. 1. Balakrishna Kar, Editor, Matrubhumi, and Proprietor of Saraswata Press. Opposite party No. 2, Rama Chandra Kar is the Printer and Publisher of Matrubhumi. Matrubhumi is a daily Oriya paper having a fair circulation in the State of Orissa. It has its weekly issue also.The opposite parties, in their paper Matrubhumi, had published several articles criticising the conduct of Shri Mahatab while he was the Chief Minister oi' Orissa and while he was a Member of the Central Cabinet of the charges uf several corrupt practices, bribery, dishonesty and some anti-social and unpatriotic acts on account of which Shri Mahatab had filed a suit for defamation in Original Suit No. 189 of 1952 in the Cour...
Dandapani Das Vs. Mohan Nayak and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-10-1953
Reported in: AIR1954Ori67
Panigrahi, C.J.1. This case raises a short, but important point relating to the jurisdiction and powers of the High Court under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution.2. The petitioner states that in January 1952 he had been returned as a member of the Orissa State Legislative Assembly, to represent the scheduled castes in the Berhampur Constituency. Opposite party No. 1, Mohan Nayak filed an election petition under Section 81, Representation of the People Act (Act 43 of 1951) challenging the validity of the election of the petitioner, along with some others his contention being that the election of returned candidates was void on the grounds stated in Sections 100 and 101 of the said Act. The election petition filed by opposite party No. 1 was referred to a tribunal constituted under the Act, for trial and was registered as Election Case No. 4 of 1952. The Tribunal, by its order dated 17-3-1953, declared the election wholly void under Section 101 (a), (b) and (c), Representation of ...
Ananto Mohini Vs. Khalli Sahu and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-08-1953
Reported in: AIR1954Ori107; 20(1954)CLT146
Mohanty, J.1. This was a suit by the plaintiff-respondent 1 to enforce a mortgage bond executed by respondent 2 Suvarno Mohini as the mother-guardian or the appellant during his minority in favour of Ananda Mohanty, the deceased father of defendants-respondents 9 and 10 on 3-2-1933. The principal sum advanced on the mortgage-bond was Rs. 500/-. The claim was laid at for Rs. 1,000/-. In 1947, defendant-respondents 9 and 10 after the death of their father transferred that mortgage-bond to the respondent 1 for consideration. Respondent 1 as a transferee of the mortgage has brought the suit for recovery of the mortgage-amount by sale of the mortgaged property.Defendants 3 to 8 who are respondents 3 to 8 have purchased a portion of the mortgaged property, subsequent to the mortgage in question. Defendants 3, 4, and 6 have filed a written statement claiming that their purchased property should be sold last of all, if the mortgage amount cannot be entirely recovered by the sale of the remaini...
Polaki Kotesam and ors. Vs. S.M. Patnaik, I.A.S. Registration Officer ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-08-1953
Reported in: AIR1954Ori87
Panigrahi, C.J.1. At the conclusion of the hearing of this petition on 1-9-1953, we intimated our decision to the parties and took time to formulate our reasons for our order. I now proceed to set out the reasons for dismissing the petition.2. The petitioners, four in number, are residents of Berhampur Municipality in Ganjam district and were registered as voters in the electoral roll prepared in the year 1950. At the general election held in January 1952, two candidates were returned to the Orissa State Legislative Assembly from the Berhampur Constituency, but their election was set aside on 17-3-1953, by an order of the election tribunal, in Election Case No. 4 of 1952. A by election was directed to be held under Section 150, Representation of the People Act, 1950 (Act 43 of 1950) and 7-5-1953 was fixed as the last date for receiving nominations and 14-6-1953, for conducting the poll. On the 7th May one Sri Gadi Narayanamurti, an Advocate of Berhampur whose name had been registered i...
Pitamhari Dibya Vs. Chandrasekhar Praharaj and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-01-1953
Reported in: AIR1954Ori71; 19(1953)CLT520
Panigrahi, C.J.1. In this appeal the petitioner has filed an application under Rule 7 of Order 45, Civil P. C. and prays for permission to give property security in lieu of cash or Government securities. In order fully to appreciate the nature of this application a statement of the facts is necessary. The judgment of this Court in -- 'Chandrasekhar Praharaj v. Pitambari Dibya', A. I. R. 1953 Orissa 315 (A); against which leave to appeal was sought was delivered on 28-1-53, decreeing the suit filed by the opposite parties. On 10-3-53, the petitioner applied for a certificate that the value and nature of the suit fulfilled the requirements of Section 110, Civil P. C. On 21-4-53 a Bench of this Court ordered the issue of a certificate as the requirements of Section 110 had been satisfied and two days later the certificate was signed by the learned Judges who ordered the issue of the same.The petitioner thereafter moved the Court for stay of execution of the decree and we directed that hal...
Sundar Sahu Gountia and ors. Vs. Chamra Sahu Gountia and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-01-1953
Reported in: AIR1954Ori80
Panigrahi, C.J. 1. This is an appeal directed against an order passed by the subordinate Judge, Sambalpur under Order 23, Rule 3, C. P. C., refusing to record an adjustment of Title Suit No. 28 of 1950, which is pending on his file.2. The facts giving rise to this litigation are that the plaintiff Chamra Sahu, defendant No. 1 Sundar Sahu, and defendant No. 9 Bhikarycharan Sahu are uterine brothers. It is said that ever since the year 1949 there has been disputes going on between the brothers for a partition of their family properties. Several attempts appear to have been made for an amicable partition of the properties, all of which however failed on account of the intransigence of one party or another. The plaintiff, therefore, filed a suit for partition on 7-7-1950 in the Court of the Subordinate Judge, Sambalpur, against defendant 1 and the members of his branch, defendant 9 and his branch, and impleaded defendants 12 to 16, who are his remote cousins, as their names have been joint...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›