Orissa Court December 1961 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.
Tulsiram Sanganeria and anr. Vs. Smt. Anni Bai and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Dec-22-1961
Reported in: AIR1963Ori11
G.C. Das, J.1. Five different plaintiffs filed five different suits against certain defendants including the present appellants basing their claim on 5 different pro-notes. The suits were: Money Suit No. 20/235 of 1952; Money Suit No. 461/234 of 1952/55; Money Suit No. 75; Money Suit No. 84 of 1952 and Money Suit No. 110 of 1952. In the first two suits the two handnotes were executed by Manilal on behalf of Surajmal Manilal Firm whereas in the latter three suits the pronotes were executed in favour of the different plaintiffs by Pannalal, another partner of Surajmal Manilal firm. All the 5 suits were heard together and were governed by one common judgment. In respect of the first 2 suits, the valuation being low appeals were preferred before the District Judge. In the latter three suits, the value being appealable to this Court, three appeals were filed before this Court. First appeal No. 82/58 arises out of money suit No. 75/52; First appeal No. 83/58 arises out of Money Suit No. 84/5...
Smt. Puddipeddi Laxminarasamma Vs. Gadi Ranganayakemma and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Dec-22-1961
Reported in: AIR1962Ori147
S. Barman, J.1. The unsuccessful plaintiff in both the courts below is the appellant--in this second appeal,--from a confirming decision of the learned District Judge, Ganjam Boudh, whereby he affirmed a decision of the learned Munsif of Berhampur, and dismissed the plaintiffs suit for partition of 2/5ths share of the suit properties (being the properties of defendants 2 to 9, 14 and 15), purchased by the plaintiff from an auctionpurchaser at court sale in execution of a mortgage decree, on the ground that the suit is barred by limitation, in the circumstances hereinafter stated.2. The facts,--few and simple,--are these; On April 23, 1940 defendant No. 1 had purchased the suit properties (being dwelling house (tiled) with lands appurtenant thereto) at Court auction sale in execution of a certain mortgage decree; on April 26, 1940 the sale was confirmed; on September 17, 1941 the sale certificate was issued; on April 20, 1943 delivery of possession is said to have been given to the purc...
Budhi Panigrahi and ors. Vs. Bhagirathi SwaIn and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Dec-22-1961
Reported in: AIR1962Ori159
Barman, J.1. This is plaintiff-appellants' petition under Article 133 of the Constitution for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court against the decision of a Division Bench of this Court,--in First Appeal No. 23 of 1955 and First Appeal No. 12 of 1956 which were heard analogously,--setting aside the decision of the trial court in the said Title Suits whereby the trial Court decreed the suits of the plaintiffs (petitioners herein).2. The main point for consideration is the question of valuation which, according to the plaintiff-petitioners, is not less than Rs. 20,000/-.For determination of the value of the subject-matter of the dispute, it is necessary to go into certain relevant facts which ore hereinafter stated.3. In the said two first appeals decided by this Court, the main points involved related to questions whether the lease in respect of suit lands by the zamindar of Dharakote Estate in the district of Ganjam in favour of the plaintiffs was in good faith and for valuable conside...
Gour Chandra Rout and anr. Vs. Public Prosecutor
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Dec-15-1961
Reported in: 26(1960)CLT362; 1962CriLJ574
S. Barman, J.1. This is an application for leave to appeal the Supreme Court, under Articles 132 and 134 of the Constitution from a decision, made by this Court in Criminal appeal No. 108 of 1960 filed by the Editor and Printer and Publisher of the 'Matrubhumi', an Oriya Daily Mews-paper, against an order of conviction and sentence Under Section 501 Indian Penal Code, passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Cuttack-Dhenkanai, on a certain harge of defamation, alleged to have been committed against the Governor of Orissa Sri Y. N. Sukthanker in respect of his conduct in the discharge of his public functions, during the ministerial crisis in the State in May, 1953.2. One of the main points for consideration in the Criminal appeal, was the question of maintainability of the prosecution, namely, whether or not the prosecution was maintainable as in compliance with the provisions f Section 198-B, Code of Criminal Procedure, relating to prosecution for defamation against public servants in res...
Radhakanta Patnaik Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Dec-08-1961
Reported in: AIR1962Ori125
Barman, J.1. The plaintiff is the appellant--in this first appeal,--from a decision of the learned Additional Subordinate Judge of Cuttack, whereby he dismissed the plaintiff's suit against the State of Orissa for a decree of Rs. 20.000/- as damages for wrongful dismissal and other incidental reliefs in the circumstances hereinafter stated.2. The facts, shortly stated were these. The plaintiff (appellant herein) one Radhakanta Patnaik was a temporary Overseer of the Public Works Department appointed on June, 1942. He was in charge of Manijanga Section under Jagatsingpur Subdivision when on December 17, 1950 the Chief Engineer, defunct Irrigation Department, Orissa intimated to the S. D. O. P. W. D. Jagatsingpur that he (the Chief Engineer) would tour in his area from 24th to 27th December, 1950 and desired that Anantapur-Paradwip service road was made motorable for the station-wagon; accordingly the S.D.O., Jagatsingpur ordered the plaintiff,--who was the Sectional Officer then in char...
State of Orissa Vs. Nityananda Bohidar
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Dec-05-1961
Reported in: AIR1962Ori105
Narasimham, C.J. 1. This is an application by the State of Orissa for grant of leave to appeal to the Supreme Court against a Division Bench decision o this Court in O. J. C. No. 202 of 1960 reported in ILR (1961) Cut 373; (AIR 1962 Orissa 78). The leave was asked for both under Article 132 and under Sub-clause (c) of Clause (1) of Article 133 of the Constitution.2. The respondent Nityananda Bohidar was formerly working as an Assistant Conservator of Forests under the Government of Orissa. A departmental enquiry was held against him by the Member, Administrative Tribunal, 'Orissa, in respect of various acts of misconduct said to have been committed by him while he was working as Divisional Forest Officer, Parlakhimedi. 21 charges were framed against him and the Tribunal fully exonerated him in respect of 5 charges and partially in respect of 6 charges, but held him guilty in respect of the remaining charges and recommended his dismissal from Government Service. Government accepted the ...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›