Orissa Court September 1958 Judgments
Lunkaran Agarwala Vs. the State
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-30-1958
Reported in: AIR1959Ori50; 1959CriLJ358
ORDERR.L. Narasimham, C.J. 1. This is a petition, in revision, against the appellate judgment of the Sessions Judge of Cuttack Dhenkanal maintaining the conviction of the petitioner under Sections 112 and 123 of the Motor Vehicles Act and the sentence of fine passed on him, by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate of Athmalik.2. The petitioner is the owner of public carrier vehicle bearing No. ORD-111. The route permit for the vehicle (Ext. 2) authorised the plying of the vehicle on the following routes, namely, (i) Cuttack-Sambalpur (ii) Angul-Hindol, (iii) Angul-Athmalik and (iv) Angul-Talcher during fair weather.On 9-3-1956 the said vehicle was found plying on the Bamur-Kishorenagar road, by the A.S.I. (P.W. 1). It was driven by one Alekhmoni Biswal. The Police Officer (P.W. 1) found five Muliahs (servants) in addition to the driver and the cleaner. The route permit (Ex. 2) limits the number of Muliahs in the vehicle to four. Hence the owner and the driver were both sen! up for trial for (i...
Tag this Judgment!K. Raja Gopal Rao Vs. Dolgobinda Sahu and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-24-1958
Reported in: AIR1959Ori31
S.P. Mohapatra, J. 1. Defendant No. 2, who was a claimant in a proceeding under Order XXI, Rule 58, C.P.C. has brought this second appeal against the judgment and decree-dated 26-2-1954 of Sri K. C. Mohapatra, Subordinate Judge of Cuttack, dismissing the appeal on. a preliminary issue as the persons vitally interested in the appeal were not made party-respondents. 2. The suit out of which the present appeal arises was one under Order XXI, Rule 63, C.P.C. the plaintiff being the decree-holder who was unsuccessful in the Claim Case brought by the present defendant No. 2, appellant, under Order XXI, Rule 58 C.P.C. The plaintiff and defendant No. 4 obtained a money decree on 23-2-1943 for a sum of Rs. 3582/8/3, when the properties in suit were attached by the plaintiff, a claim was put forth by the present defendant No. 2, which being allowed the plaintiff brought, the suit. 3. Defendant No. 1 is the judgment-debtor. Defendants 3 and 3-Ka are the Zamindars. Defendant No. 4 is the joint dec...
Tag this Judgment!Dasarathi Chamar and anr. Vs. Balmukunda Das and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-17-1958
Reported in: AIR1959Ori38
S.P. Mohapatra, J. 1. This second appeal has been filed by defendants 1 and 4 against the judgment of reversal dated 22-4-1954 of Sri R. C. Misra, District Judge of Sumbulpur arising out of a suit brought by the plaintiff for a mere declaration of his title to the property in dispute with an area of 25-84 acres appertaining to holding No. 9; the rental payable in respect of the holding being Rs. 6/12/- only. The cause of action for the suit is the order of attachment under Section 146, Criminal Procedure Code, dated 5-3-1951, arising out of proceedings under Section 145 of the said Code started at the instance of the present appellants. The recorded tenants in respect of the holding were defendant No. 1 Dasarathi Chamar and his brother Kunjaban. 2. The plaintiff's version is that a deed of surrender was executed by defendant No. 1 for self and on behalf of his minor sons (defendants 3 to 5) and his brother's major son, defendant No. 2; that the deed of surrender was also registered on ...
Tag this Judgment!Mahima Byasadeba Gadi and ors. Vs. Dinabandhu Mohanty and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-12-1958
Reported in: AIR1960Ori16
Mohapatra, J.1. This is a plaintiffs' second appeal against the reversing judgment of the lower appellate Court arising out of a suit for declaration of title On the basis of a purchase of the disputed land with an area 0.42 acre out of the total acreage of 0.66 appertaining to Plot No. 901 and for confirmation of possession. The plaintiffs' version is that Luxmidhar Mohanty was the original ancestor of the parties to whom the property belonged. Luxmidhar had three sons: Chakradhar, who died a bachelor prior to the final publication of the Current Settlement record-of-rights Dinabandhu (defendant No.1) and Krupasin-dhu, the deceased husband of Kshetramoni (defendant No. 4). Luxmidhar died prior to 1930, and his widow died on 21st January 1949. Krupasindhu however had died in the year 1940 leaving behind him his widow Kshetramoni. Defendants 2 and 3 are the transferees from defendant No. 1, Dinabandhu, son of Lukmidhar. The suit property stood in the name of Krupasindhu in the current s...
Tag this Judgment!Rajan Patro Vs. Akur Sahu and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-12-1958
Reported in: AIR1959Ori74
S.P. Mohapatra, J. 1. This is a plaintiff's second appeal against the judgment and decree dated 22nd August 1953 of Sri N.G. Ganguli, District Judge of Cuttack, confirming a decision of the Additional Munsif of Jaipur, arising out of a suit for declaration of title, recovery of possession and for damages to the extent of Rs. 388-11-0.2. The facts found and which appear from the records are as follows ;The suit property belongs to defendant No. 1 and the fathers of defendants 2 to 5, The defendants contracted to sell the disputed land in favour of the plaintiff on 16th March 1935 and in pursuance of the said contract a Kabala was executed on 19th March 1935 for a consideration of Rs. 300/-. The defendants however did not get the Kabala registered.The plaintiff therefore brought Title Suit No. 1123 of 1938 against the defendants which, in substance, was one for specific performance of contract. The plaintiff prayed that the defendants be ordered to get the document registered, failing wh...
Tag this Judgment!Nirmal Chandra Bose Vs. Sudhendu Kumar Dutta and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-10-1958
Reported in: AIR1959Ori77
R.L. Narasimham, C.J.1. This is an appeal from the judgment of the Subordinate Judge, Berhampur, rejecting an application by the appellant-petitioner under Section 20 of the Arbitration Act on the ground that the Berhampur Court had no jurisdiction to entertain that application, and that the Civil Court in Calcutta alone has such jurisdiction.2. The material facts are as follows:The appellant is a contractor residing in Calcutta. Respondent No. 1 is also a permanent resident of Calcutta whereas respondent No. 2, Bhagaban Sahu is a resident of Aska in the district of Ganjam. The three persons entered into a partnership on 29-2-1952, (Ext. 1) for the purpose of jointly working Government Forest Coupes in Ganjam district after taking the same on lease from the Forest Department. The terms of contract between them were embodied in the deed of partnership (Ext. 1).The material clauses are clauses 7 and 8. Clause 7 says that the profits and losses of the partnership business shall be borne i...
Tag this Judgment!State of Orissa Vs. Basanta Bag
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-09-1958
Reported in: AIR1959Ori33; 1959CriLJ353
R.L. Narasimham, C.J. 1. This is a reference by the Sessions Judge of Sambalpur for confirmation of the sentence of death passed on the appellant Basanta Bag for having committed murder of a boy aged four years in Sambalpur town on 17-3-1958. The condemned person filed an appeal from Jail and the appeal and the reference were heard together and will be dealt with in this judgment. 2. The deceased whose name was Prakash Chandra Varma alias Babu was the son of one Janardan Presad Varma (P.W. 3) a teacher of Sambalpur Zilla School. Janardan had six daughters, the youngest being a child aged one and a half years and only one son namely the deceased. He was residing in a double-storeyed house in Sambalpur town with his wife Rajeswari (P.W. 6) and his children. The accused also used to reside in Sambalpur town in the house of his sister Arati Kuntuni (P.W 1) and was selling biscuits. The members of the family of Janardan Presad Varma used to call him 'the Biscuit wala' because for about six ...
Tag this Judgment!The State Vs. P. Topno, Income Tax Officer, Titlagarh.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-09-1958
Reported in: 24(1958)CLT479; [1959]36ITR135(Orissa)
RAO, J. - By an order of this court dated January 28, 1958, a notice was issued on January 31, 1958, to Shri P. Topno, Income-tax Officer, Titlagarh, to show cause, why he should not be committed for contempt of court for having started a legal proceeding against the official liquidator in a pending winding up case under the Companies Act after the order for winding up was passed, without the leave of the court.By an order passed on August 30, 1957, the Koraput Swadhin Motor Transport Company Limited was ordered to be wound up by this court and the official liquidator was directed to proceed with the administration of the estate in accordance with the provisions of the Indian Companies Act, 1956. From that date, under section 456 of the Companies Act, all the property and effects of the company should be deemed to be in the custody of the court. Under section 446 of the said Act when a winding up order has been made, no suit or other legal proceeding shall be commenced against the comp...
Tag this Judgment!Jagannath Dalai Vs. Rama Chandra Nahak and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-04-1958
Reported in: AIR1959Ori26
S.P. Mohapatra, J.1. This miscellaneous appeal is by the appellant Jagannath Dalai under the provisions of the Representation of the People Act, 3.951 (hereinafter called the Act), against the order dated 25-9-1957 of Mr. P. K. Kaul, Sole Member, Election Tribunal, Bhubaneswar. The Appellant,as a matter of extra caution, has filed O. J. C. No. 175 of 1957 under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution, which arises out of the same order.Both the matters were heard together and will be covered by this Judgment. The two matters were heard by a Bench of this Court, and as my learned brothers differed in their opinion on points of law appearing in the separate judgment of each of my learned brothers, the matter has been referred to me under Clause 28 of the Letters Patent as well as under Chapter III, Rule 5 and Chapter XIV, Rule 8 of the Orissa High Court Rules.2. The facts have been exhaustively narrated in each of the judgments of my learned brothers and it would not servo any useful pu...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›