Orissa Court August 1956 Judgments
Pandab Bissoyi and ors. Vs. Magiti Sasamal
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-31-1956
Reported in: AIR1957Ori17; 22(1956)CLT479
Narasimham, C.J.1. This is a defendants' appeal against the appellate judgment of the Additional District Judge of Berhampur reversing the judgment of the Additional Munsif of Berhampur and decreeing the plaintiff's suit for a permanent injunction against the appellants-defendants.2. The plaintiff is the owner of about 18i acres of land in three villages, Phulta, Burukuddi and Dasapore, in Berhampur taluk. He alleged that the lands were all along in his personal cultivation and that the defendants had neither any right to those lands nor were they ever cultivating them as his tenants:According to the plaintiff the defendants were mostly coolies, without any property, and being rowdies by nature they wanted to lay claim to the disputed lands as tenants taking advantages of the provisions of the Orissa Tenants Protection Act. In the plaint it was admitted that the defendants had served registered notice on the plaintiff intimating that they would cut and remove the crops on a date specif...
Tag this Judgment!Vyasyaraju Venkataratanam Raju Vs. Damodar Sahu and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-31-1956
Reported in: AIR1957Ori32; 22(1956)CLT497
Das, J. 1. This is a plaintiff's appeal against the original decree passed by Sri R.C. Misra, Subordinate Judge of Berhampur, dated 27-1-1948, in Money Suit No. 180 of 1946. The plaintiff's suit was based upon a handnote, (Ext. I), dated 31-8-1944, for a sub of Rs. 15,000/- payable with interest at 12 per cent per annum. The defendants were the members of a Hindu joint family till 1943, when a partition suit, O. S. 23 of 1943 of the Court of the Subordinate Judge, Berhampur was filed. The defendants own a sugar mill and a distillery at Aska and a saw mill at Russelkonda. During the pendency of the aforesaid suit, defendants 1 and 2 were appointed as receivers and defendant-as receiver was in-charge of the above mentioned two mills along with certain other landed properties. In the year 1944, the defendant No. 1 Receiver, was in need of depositing with the Government a sum of Rs. 15,000/- for continued work in the distillery at Aska. Accordingly, the defendant-1 filed a petition before ...
Tag this Judgment!Ramakantha Khadigar Vs. the State
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-30-1956
Reported in: AIR1957Ori10; 1957CriLJ78
Narasimham, C.J. 1. This is an application for grant of a certificate, under Article 134(1)(c) of the Constitution, to appeal to the Supreme Court against the judgment of a Division Bench of this Court in Criminal Appeal No. 166 of 1954, dismissing the appeal by the petitioner against his conviction and sentence under Sections 330 and 448, Penal Code, passed by the Assistant Sessions Judge of Sambalpur.The petitioner, Ramakantha Khadigar, was during the relevant period serving as the Assistant Sub-Inspector of Police at Paikmal P. S. The case against him was that during the night of 2-5-1954 he tortured one Dasarathi Duba (P. W. 9) who was suspected to have committed burglary with a view to extort a concession from him. The said suspect, unable to bear the torture, subsequently attempted to commit suicide by cutting his throat. He, however, recovered from his injury to the neck.The evidence against the petitioner consisted mainly of the statement of the victim Dasarathi Duba (P. W. 9) ...
Tag this Judgment!Baidyanath Mohanty and anr. Vs. Kunjabehari Das Mohapatra and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-24-1956
Reported in: 22(1956)CLT435; 1957CriLJ288
ORDERNarasimham, C.J.1. This is a criminal revision against an order passed by the Additional Sessions Judge of Mavurbihanj, on an anneal under Section 520, Criminal Procedure Code, against an order passed by the Magistrate, First Class, Balasore, who, after dropping a proceeding under Section 145 of that Code, directed that the entire paddy from the attached property should be delivered to the first party after making the necessary deductions.2. The learned Additional Sessions Judge thought that after dropping the proceeding under Section 143, Criminal Procedure Code, the learned Magistrate had no jurisdiction to pass consequential orders regarding the disposal of the attached property as he had become functus officio. Here, however, the learned Sessions Judge was clearly wrong. It is true that after dropping the proceeding under Section 145 the learned Magistrate may not have jurisdiction, under Sub-section (8) of that section, to pass any orders directing the disposal of the attache...
Tag this Judgment!Lingraj Misra Vs. Ananta Misra and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-21-1956
Reported in: AIR1957Ori63
Mohapatra, J.1. This first appeal has been filed by the plaintiff against the judgment and decree dated 21-3-1949 of Sri R. C. Misra, Subordinate Judge of Berhampur, in a suit where the main prayer is for partition of the properties described in Schedules A to J. One Gopinath Misra had three sons, Pandabo, Bacho and Agadhu. Plaintiff Lingaraj is the son of Agadhu. His younger brother Banamali died sometime in the year 1938-39.Ananta (defendant 1), who was the natural born son of Agadhu, was adopted by Pandaoo. There is no dispute about this adoption. Bacho died leaving behind two sons Mukunda and Madano (defendants 6 and 7 respectively). Defendants 2 to 5 are the sons of defendant 1. Defendants 6 and 7 and 8 to 11 are impleaded in the suit as they have got interests in the properties described in Schedules D and E only. The other defendants are subsequent alienees in respect of some items of properties in suit.2. The main contest in the suit is as between plaintiff Lingaraj and defenda...
Tag this Judgment!Orient Paper Mills Ltd. and anr. Vs. the State
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-16-1956
Reported in: AIR1957Ori232; 23(1957)CLT221
P.V.B. Rao, J. 1. These two cases are heard analogously as they involve similar questions of facts and common questions of law and are disposed of by this single Judgment. 2. Company Act Case No. 6 of 1955 is an application by the Orient Paper Mills Ltd., a limited liability Company having its registered office at Brajrajnagar in the district of Sambalpur in the State of Orissa, under Section 12 of the Indian Companies Act, 1913 for confirming a special resolution of the Company passed at an extra-ordinary general meeting on 26-8-1955. 3. Company Act Case No. 7 of 1955 is an application by the Hindusthan Cellulose and PaperMills Ltd., a limited liability Company having itsregistered office at Brajrajnagar in the district ofSambalpur in the State of Orissa, under Section 12 ofthe Indian Companies Act, 1913 for confirminga special resolution duly passed at an extra-ordinary general meeting of the Company heldon 26-8-1955. 4. Both the special resolutions were to the effect that the regist...
Tag this Judgment!Gandu Behera and ors. Vs. Bala Behera
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-13-1956
Reported in: AIR1957Ori237
Mohapatra, J. 1. This second appeal has been filed by the defendants against the confirming judgment of the lower appellate Court arising out of a suit brought by the plaintiff for declaration of title and recovery of possession. It is the admitted case of both parties that the propertyin suit belonged to Kangali Behera who died prior to 1922. The plaintiff claims to be the first cousin of Kangali. Kangali died leaving his widow Sabi Bewa. Sabi having died in the year 1951, thepresent suit has been brought by the plaintiff for recovery of possession. Defendant No. 1 (Gandu Behera) is the son of Sabi through her second husband. Defendants 2 to 4 are the transferees in respect of portions of the disputed property. 2. The defendants resisted the claim of the plaintiff an several allegations that the plaintiff is not the next reversioner of Kangali; that Sabi had obtained absolute rights in respect of the disputed property. 3. It appears from Ext. 3 that the disputed property was allotted ...
Tag this Judgment!Markando Panda and ors. Vs. Ronkonidhi Panigrahi
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-03-1956
Reported in: 22(1956)CLT488; 1957CriLJ146
ORDERBalakrishna Rao, J.1. The seven petitioners were convicted by the Special First Class Magistrate, Aska, for an offence punishable under Section 143, Indian Penal Code, and each was sentenced to a fine of Rs. 20/-.2. They were tried for an offence under Section 144, Indian Penal Code, as also for offences under Sections 324 and 352, I. P. C. The Magistrate acquitted petitioners 1, 2, 3 and S who were also charged under Section 324, Indian Penal Code, of that offence as also petitioners 4, 5 and 7 of the offence under Section 352, Indian Penal Code. The Magistrate in categorical terms held that the offences under Sections 324 and 352, Indian Penal Code, were not proved. He also found that no deadly weapons were used.3. Mr. G. K. Misra, the learned Counsel for the petitioners contends that there is no valid charge framed against the accused for which they can be cried; that the petitioners and the complainant were in joint possession of the land measuring 22 cents, the complainant ow...
Tag this Judgment!Ramachandra Deb and ors. Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-02-1956
Reported in: 23(1957)CLT324
Narasimham, C.J.1. These are applications by six of the ex-Zamindars of Ganjam district under Article 226 or the Constitution praying for relief against the State of Orissa, from apprehended danger to their property situated in portions of Ganjam Agency tracts known as 'Maliahs' by threat of executive action. The questions of law involved in all these applications are identical, and hence they were heard together and will be dealt with in one judgment.2. The zamindaris of these applicants were all situated in Ganjam plains (now partly in Orissa and partly in Andhra State) and had been permanently settled with them by the well-known Madras Regulation No. XXV of 1802. These zamindaris have been acquired by the respective Governments under the provisions of the Estate Abolition Act. Adjacent west of Ganjam plaina lie hilly tracts (inhabited mainly by aboriginals) known as Agency tracts, portions of which Were granted to these zamindars by various Sanads of the Governor-in-Council of Fort ...
Tag this Judgment!Narayan Das Vs. Member Board of Revenue and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-02-1956
Reported in: AIR1956Ori219
Rao, J.1. The petitioner files this application under Arts. 226 and 311 of the Constitution of India for issue of a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ on the Member, Board of Revenue, Orissa, Sambalpur and the State of Orissa, setting aside the order of dismissal passed on him and directing that he should be deemed to be in service.2. The petitioner Narayan Das was appointed on 20-4-49 as a lower division assistant in the office of the Chief Administrator and Special Commissioner, Orissa, which was renamed as the office of the Commissioner for Northern Division and shifted to Sambalpur where it formed a part of the Board of Revenue.On 3-8-50, he took admission in Gangadhar Meher College, Sambalpur in the First Year Commerce Class and passed the I. Com. examination of the Utkal University in 1952. He filed a petition for permission to continue his studies on 28-4. 61, on being asked to file one and the said permission was refused on 24-7-51, but nevertheless be...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »