Orissa Court November 1958 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.
Mathuri Mallik Vs. Satrughna Giri and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Nov-29-1958
Reported in: AIR1959Ori81; 1959CriLJ624
ORDERR.L. Narasimham, C.J. 1. This is a petition in revision against an order passed by Sri B. Misra, First Class Magistrate of Balasore, dropping a proceeding under Section 145, Cr. P. C. and directing the management of the disputed properties by a Receiver till the rights of the parties are decided by a competent Civil Court.2. The proceedings were started in respect of 32 acres of land on the 20th February 1957 on the report of the local Police to the effect that there was apprehensions of breach of peace. The disputed properties were also attached and kept under the management of one Chintamoni Mohanty pending the disposal of the proceeding. The learned Magistrate, after scrutinising the affidavits filed by both parties and hearing them passed an order on the 9th September 1957 to the following effect :'From the documents filed by the parties it is not possible to come to any definite conclusion about possession of the suit lands by either of the parties.'Then he discussed the cont...
Brahmananda Panda Vs. Kanduri Charan Das and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Nov-29-1958
Reported in: AIR1959Ori126
P.V. Balakrishnarao, J.1. Defendants 1 and 2 who are brothers filed this appeal against the judgment and decree of Shri B. S. Patnaik, Subordinate Judge of Cuttack, in a suit for recovery of money due on a mortgage bond. Respondent No. 1 is the plaintiff. Respondents 2, 3 and 4 are the sons of defendant No. 1, respondents 3 and 4 being minors. Respondent No. 5 is Sushila Dibya, widow of defendant No. 1. Appellant No. 1-defendant No. 1 having died during the pendency of the appeal, respondents 2, 3, 4 and 5 are his legal representatives.2. The plaintiffs case is that the defendants formed a joint family of which defendants 1 and 2 are the managing members; that defendants 1 and 2 incurred a loan of Rs. 5999/- by registered mortgage bond dated 6-2-37 in order to pay off antecedent debts stipulating to repay it within one year with interest at 9 per cent per annum; and that defendants 1 and 2 not having repaid the loan except a sum of Rs. 400/- on 1-2-44, the suit is filed by the plaintif...
Banchhanidhi Patra Vs. State
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Nov-29-1958
Reported in: AIR1959Ori177; 1959CriLJ1351
ORDERR.L. Narasimham, C.J.1. This is a petition, in revision, against the appellate judgment of the Sessions Judge of Cuttack maintaining the conviction of the petitioner under Section 5 of the Telegraph Wires (Unlawiul Possession) Act 1950 passed by a 1st Class Magistrate of Cuttack, but reducing the sentence to a fine of Rs. 500/-. At the time of the admission of this revision petition notice was issued to the petitioner to show cause why the sentence may not be enhanced to a substantive sentence of imprisonment and he was also given an opportunity to show cause against his conviction. The petition was heard like a regular criminal appeal and questions of fact and law were both fully argued.2. The petitioner is a cloth dealer of Ramgarh in Tangi P. Section On 28-3-1954, his house was searched by the Police and two copper wire bundles (M. Os. 1 and 2) were seized from the verandah of his house. The petitioner was present at the time of the seizure and he produced before the Police Off...
State of Orissa Vs. Gokul Barik
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Nov-20-1958
Reported in: AIR1959Ori97; 1959CriLJ752
G.C. Das, J.1. In this appeal the State of Orissa had challenged the order of acquittal recorded by Sri I. C. Misra, Sessions Judge, Bolangir-Kalaliandi, dated 19-10-1957. The simple question in this case is whether the respondent, Gokul Barik, is guilty of an offence under Section 171D of the Indian Penal Code. The facts leading upto this prosecution were that the respondent on the date of poll falsely personated himself at the polling station of Ghasian of the Patnagarh Assembly Constituency.The defence was that he was otherwise known in the village as 'Ghuma Barik' and since the name of Ghuma appeared in the electoral roll, he in the bona fide belief that he had the right to vote, went to the polling station to cast his vote. His defence, however, was not accepted by the learned Magistrate who tried him at the first instance and convicted him under Section 171F and sentenced him to pay a fine of Rs. 100/-, in default to undergo Rule I. for three months. The respondent against this o...
Chaitan Charan Das Vs. Raghunath Singh
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Nov-20-1958
Reported in: AIR1959Ori141; 1959CriLJ1006
R. L. Narasimham, C.J.1. This is a petition in revision against an order ofdischarge under Section 253(2) Cr. P. C. passed by Sri B.Mohanty, Magistrate, First Class,' Cuttack, in a case under Section 500 I. P. C. brought by the petitioner againstthe opposite party.2. The material facts are as follows: In village Kamala Prasad Patna, near Olsingh in Khurda Subdivision there is a religious endowment with considerable properties attached to it. The petitioner has been claiming the endowment to be a purely private religious endowment and, as such, not subject to the provisions of the Orissa Hindu Religious Endowments Act, but some of the villagers including the opposite party have been agitating for a long time for the control of the said endowment by the Endowments Commissioner on the ground that ft was a public endowment.The petitioner on the 12th January 1949 applied to the Commissioner under Section 64 of the Orissa Hindu Religious Endowments Act 1939 (Orissa Act IV of 1939) (hereinaft...
Rambha Bewa Vs. Prahallad Sendha and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Nov-17-1958
Reported in: AIR1959Ori65
G.C. Das, J. 1. The unsuccessful plaintiff filed this appeal against an order of the District Judge Cuttack dated 19-10-195-1, dismissing his suit. Of the parties to this litigation, defendant 1 was the auction-purchaser of a part of the holding measuring 1.045 acres. Defendants 4 and 5 are the first cousins of the plaintiffs deceased husband and defendants 2 and 3 are purchasers of portion of the holding in dispute from defendants 4 and 5. Defendant 6 is the landlord of this holding. 2. The plaintiff commenced a suit for partition under these circumstances: The disputed holding measuring 2.03 acres was the ancestral property of the plaintiff's husband and defendants 4 and 5 were his first cousins. The plaintiff's whole case was that there was a severance of the joint family status between the two branches of the family and each branch, for purposes of convenience, was in actual possession of parts of the holding separately. There had never been a partition by metes and bounds. Accordi...
Daitari Mohapatra Vs. Brundaban Matia
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Nov-17-1958
Reported in: AIR1959Ori110
R.L. Narasimham, C.J.1. This is a defendant's second appeal against the appellate judgment of the District Judge of Cuttack reversing the judgment of the III Additional Munsif Cuttack and decreeing the plaintiff's suit for recovery of a certain sum of money from the defendant.2. The plaintiff alleged that there was a partnership between him and the defendant for the purpose of doing repair work to Khaira bridge in 1944 and that the wirk was completed in due course, on the 5th June 1944. The execution of the repair work was entrusted to the defendant and the plain-tiff's function as a partner was to contribute certain sums of money and also to maintain accounts.The plaintiff further alleged that though the work was completed on the 5th June 1944 the defendant evaded paying the net sum due to him on some pretext or other. He therefore brought the present suit, claiming a sum of Rs. 689-9-6. A schedule was attached to the plaint giving a complete statement of the accounts of the partnersh...
Bikal SwaIn Vs. Iswar Swain
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Nov-17-1958
Reported in: AIR1959Ori173
Das, J. 1. The only question of law raised in this appeal is, of the plaintiff was entitled to any relief under Section 4 of the Partition Act (Act No. 4 of 1895). The facts are these:2. The plaintiff brought a suit for partition of the homestead plot No. 1277, measuring 0.03 acre and the Bari plot No. 1309, measuring 0.07 acre and desired to enforce his right to purchase the undivided share previously purchased by the defendant. The plaintiff's whole case was that though the other properties had been divided, the aforesaid two plots in dispute were in joint possession and accordingly he is entitled to the relief under Section 4 of the Partition Act. The defence was that the two disputed plots had also been divided between the two branches of the family, each branch being in separate possession of his portion of the property. Since the plots were rather too small, separate possession was not shown in the settlement records.3. The trial court came to the finding that the two suit-plots ...
Sudhir Chandra Bardhan Vs. Jagadish Ch. Kar and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Nov-14-1958
Reported in: AIR1959Ori112
R.L. Narasimham, C.J.1. This is a plaintiffs appeal against the judgment of the District Judge of Mayurbhanj, reversing the judgment of the Munsif of Balasore and dismissing the plaintiff's suit with costs.2. The relationship between the parties will be clear from the following pedigree:-- NIMAI CHARAN KAR | ------------------------------------------ | | Durgamoni (1st wife) Manmohini (2nd wife) | ------------------------------- | | Sashimukhi Swarnamoni (Defendant.1 Plaintiff wife of late Bepin Behari Wife of late Lokenath Bardhan Bardhan | | -------------------- ------------------- | | | | Daughter Daughter Sudhir ch. Bardhan Late Amulya Chandra Bardhan.3. The parties are governed by the Dayabhaga 'School of Hindu law. Manmohini Dasi succeeded to the properties of her deceased husband Nimai Charan Kar as widow'; estate sometime in 1906. On 26th February, 1918 she executed a sale of deed (Ext. P) conveying the properties in dispute to her son in law the late Bipin Behari Bardhan. Bipi...
Golam Mahammad Vs. Sarif Baig
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Nov-07-1958
Reported in: AIR1960Ori18; 1960CriLJ261
ORDERP.V. Balakrishnarao, J. 1. Criminal Misc. Case No. 90 of 1957 was filed by one Golam Mahammad under Section 561A of the Criminal Procedure Code for clarification of my order in Original Revision No. 190 of 1956 and for quashing the proceeding before the Sub-Divisional Magistrate for redelivery of land started by the opposite party Sarif Baig in Criminal Misc. Case No. 19 of 1957. The petitioner also prayed that pending the disposal of the application the proceeding before the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Sadar, Dhenkanal be stayed.2. Original Criminal Misc. Case No. 8 of 1958 is a proceeding in contempt against the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Dhenkanal, which was instituted under the following circumstances: The application in Criminal Misc. Case No. 90 of 1957 was filed by the petitioner on 28-11-57 and was moved before me on the same day. By order No. 2 dated 25-11-57 I admitted the application and granted an interim stay of further proceedings in Criminal Misc. Case No. 19 of 1957...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »