Orissa Court January 1958 Judgments
Jogendra Nath Das Vs. Charan Das and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-29-1958
Reported in: AIR1958Ori160
P.V.B. Rao, J.1. The defendant files this appeal against the judgment and decree of the Subordinate Judge, Cuttack decreeing the plaintiffs' suit for partition of the suit properties except lot No. 1 mentioned in Schedule B of the plaint. The plaintiffs filed a memorandum of cross-objections against the decree disallowing the partition of lot No. 1.2. Plaintiffs' case is briefly as follows: Plaintiffs 1 and 2 and the defendant are members of a joint family governed by the Mitakshara law. Plaintiff No. 3 is the ancestral family deity of the parties who are the Shebait marfatdars. One Chintamani had four sons -- Rama, Shyama, Padan and Madan. Plaintiff No. 1 Fakir is the natural son of Madan who had another son Bidyadhar who died unmarried. Plaintiff No. 2 Mani Dei is the wife of Madan. Padan had two sons -- Bhikari and Jogendra (the defendant), Bhikari having died unmarried.According to the plaint, the properties mentioned in Schedule B of the plaint are the ancestral joint family prope...
Tag this Judgment!Dolgobinda Rath Vs. the State
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-29-1958
Reported in: AIR1958Ori224; 1958CriLJ1211
G.C. Das, J.1. This is an appeal against the judgment of the learned Additional Assistant Sessions Judge, Cuttack, dated 16-11-56 convicting the appellant under Sections 366 and 376, Indian Penal Code, and sentencing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years on each count, the sentence to run concurrently.2. The prosecution case was that the appellant who is a co-villager of one Gokhei Sahu, P. W. 8, was living at a short distance from his house. Admittedly, the accused was a bachelor and he was a solitary member of his house, his brother having remained elsewhere. The accused was the 'Dharmaputra' of P. W. 8. Sometime before the occurrence, Achuta Rath, the uncle of the accused, and Suna Dibya his father's sister, used to persuade Sashi Dei, P. W. 3, to marry the accused and to live happily in his house. The prosecution case, further, was that the accused himself used to persuade P. W. 3 and made certain presents of gold and silver ornaments and some Sarees to the girl.On 1-...
Tag this Judgment!Gopinath Puja Panda Samanta Vs. Ramchandra Deb and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-17-1958
Reported in: AIR1958Ori220; 24(1958)CLT183; 1958CriLJ1207
ORDERR.L. Narasimham, C.J.1. This revision petition arises out of a somewhat unusual criminal case instituted by one of the Puja Pandas attached to the Temple of Lord Jagannath at Puri for the prosecution of Sri Ramachandra Deb, the then Raja of Puri (since deceased), Sri Jagat Ballav Das, Dewan of the Temple, Sri P. C. Jagadeb Roy, Commander of the Temple, and Shri Jamuna Kar and Sri Bhima Padhy, Pushpalaks sebaks attached to the Temple, for offences under Sections 295, 295A, 420 and 504, Indian Penal Code. The complaint was filed before the Sub-divisional Magistrate, Puri, who after enquiry dismissed the same. On revision, the then Additional Sessions Judge of Ganjam-Nayagarh upheld the order of the Sub-divisional Magistrate, holding that no prima facie case was made out against the opposite parties. Hence this revision petition.2. The substance of the allegations made by the petitioner against the opposite parties is as follows. In the Temple of Lord Jagannath at Puri the Puja Panda...
Tag this Judgment!Kshetra Sahu Vs. Syama Sahu and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-13-1958
Reported in: AIR1958Ori254; 24(1958)CLT127
S.P. Mohapatra, J. 1. This is plaintiffs second appeal against the judgment and decree dated 19-10-1955 of Sri L. Panda Additional District Judge of Berhampur, reversing the decision of the Munsif of Aska, arising out of a suit for declaration of title and recovery of possession of eight acres and fifty cents of land as described in the schedule attached to the plaint on ejectment of the defendants therefrom. The plaintiffs case is that the plaintiffs daughter Tasoda was blind and that she had no means of livelihood. The plaintiff, therefore, by way of making provisions for her maintenance, executed Ex. 1, a deed of gift ,on 24th June 1949, which is described as 'NIRUPANAPATRA' Jasoda died in July 1951. The first defendant is the husband and the second defendant is the son of Jasoda. The third defendant is a transferee in respect of a portion of the disputed land from defendants 1 and 2. The plaintiff has brought this action on 4-9-1952 for the aforesaid reliefs on the basis of the pos...
Tag this Judgment!Bama Jena and anr. Vs. the State
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-07-1958
Reported in: AIR1958Ori106; 1958CriLJ657
ORDERR.L. Narasimham, C.J.1. This is a revision against the judgment of the Adaitional Sessions Judge of Cuttack, maintaining the conviction ot the two petitioners under Section 412, I. P. C. but reducing the sentence passed on them by the Assistant Sessions Judge of Cuttack, from three years rigorous imprisonment each to eighteen months rigorous imprisonment each.2. The two petitioners were tried by a Jury in the Court of the Assistant Sessions Judge of Cuttack tor offences under Section 395 and Section 412, I. P. C. A dacoity was committed in the house of one Khetrabasi Panigrahi during the night of the 15th/16th May 1952 and several valuable ornaments were taken away. On 21-5-1952 some of these ornaments were recovered from the house of the two appellants and they were subsequently identiiied by Khetribasi Panigrahi as some of the properties that had been looted from his house by the dacoits. Some of the witnesses also claimed to have recognised the two petitioners during the commis...
Tag this Judgment!Natabar Mohanty Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-06-1958
Reported in: AIR1958Ori148; 24(1958)CLT317
S.P. Mohapatra, J. 1. This is an appeal against the decision of Sri B. Panda, Additional District Judge of Ganjam Nayagarh, dated 27-8-1954, reversing a decision of Sri M.N. Mukherji, Additional Subordinate Judge of Puri, arising out of a suit for recovery of a sum of Rs. 2668787-with a reasonable rate of interest on the said amount as against the State of Orissa. The plaintiff was a forest contractor under the Ex-Ruler of the Ex-State of Khandapara and he was authorised to exploit timbers in accordance with the terms of an agreement (Ext. A) entered into between him and the Ex-Ruler of Khandapara.After the merger of the Khandapara State with the State of Orissa there started a proceeding against the present plaintiff for having illegally cut 57 Sal trees; the Administrator by his order dated 19-2-1948 in the Forest Case No. 160 of 1947-48 ordered the present plaintiff to pay a sum of Rs. 3043/8/- as royalty and compensation for the alleged unauthorised act. The plaintiff paid a sum of...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›