Skip to content

Orissa Court August 1963 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.

Aug 07 1963

Sibasankar Tiadi Vs. Koli Tihadhiani and ors.

Court: Orissa

Decided on: Aug-07-1963

Reported in: AIR1964Ori106; 29(1963)CLT681

G.K. Misra, J.1. Plaintiff is the petitioner. He filed a suit in forma pauperis in MJC 22 of 1962 in the Court of the Munsif of Aska. On the very day (31-1-1962) the petition was filed, he was examined on oath by the learned Munsif. In that statement he clearly stated in terms of Order 33, Rule 5(c) and (e), C. P. C. A notice was issued on the opposite parties and the Government. There was contest on the question of pauperism. The learned Munsif found that the petitioner was a pauper. He, however, dismissed the application under Order 33, Rule 1, C. P. C. holding'Even though by his evidence the petitioner was able to establish his lack of means to pay the necessary court-fee still he is bound to fail as he did not make out the other ingredients for granting him permission to sue as a pauper as prescribed under Order 33 Rule 5, C. P. C. He remained completely silent about those ingredients.'2. One is at a loss to appreciate as to what exactly are the other ingredients under Order 33, Ru...


Aug 06 1963

Pattam Satyabadi Patra Vs. Kasinath Bissoyi and anr.

Court: Orissa

Decided on: Aug-06-1963

Reported in: AIR1964Ori41

S. Barman, J. 1. Defendant No. 1 is the appellant Defendant No. 2 is the State of Orissa against whom no relief is claimed by the plaintiff. The plaintiff belongs, to village Burudapalli. Defendant No. 1 belongs to an adjoining village Brahmanpur. The plaintiff filed the suit for grant of a permanent injunction against defendant No. 1 restraining him from diverting water in defendant No. 1's 'Bhanja Billa' lying, west of 'Bana Nala' in survey No. 84 to the east of the said Nala by fixing any pipe or any other contrivance across the canal in survey No. 84 and restraining him from allowing these waters from passing to the fields of the plaintiff and other members of his family.2. The dispute between the parties arose thus: 'Dayapalli Nala' is an irrigation channel. Defendant No. 1 had land about 100 bharanams in extent? called 'Bhanja Billa' to the east of the said Dayapalli Nala (Irrigation channel)., To the east of defendant's 'Bhanja Billa' (paddy land) there is a drainage channel cal...


Aug 05 1963

Moti Dei Vs. Cuttack Bank Ltd. and ors.

Court: Orissa

Decided on: Aug-05-1963

Reported in: AIR1964Ori185; 30(1964)CLT22

ORDERG.K. Misra, J. 1. Moti Dei, one of the judgment-debtors, is-the petitioner. The fate of the revision depends upon a narrow point. The judgment-debtors filed an application under Sections 10 and 11 of the Orissa Money Lenders Act for re-opening and scaling down the decree. It was dismissed on 17-8-1961 by Sri S.K. Misra, Subordinate Judge, Cuttack. A memorandum was filed by the advocate for the judgment-debtors on 21-8-1961. The same learned Judge considered the memorandum and held that the petition of the judgment-debtors was without merit. On 27-11-61 the judgment-debtors filed another application under Sections 10 and 11 of the Orissa Money Lenders Act for scaling down the decree on the ground that the decree, as defined in Section 2 (g) of the Orissa Money Lenders Act, includes both a preliminary and a final decree, and that the calculation of payments till the passing of the final decree on 20-11-1950 is to be taken into consideration to determine whether the final decree is h...


  • Next ›

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial