Orissa Court September 1963 Judgments
Abhiram Sabat and ors. Vs. Shyamsundar Sabat and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-29-1963
Reported in: AIR1964Ori59
Narasimham, C. J. 1. This is an appeal by the plaintiffs against the judgment of the Subordinate Judge of Berhampur partially decreeing their claim. There is alsoa cross-objection by some of the contesting defendants against that portion of the decree whichwent against them. 2. The following geneological tree will behelpful in appreciating the points involved in thislitigation: PATITO SABATA (ancestor) (dead) | -------------------------------------------- | | Raghunath Sabat Radhakrushna Sabat (Plaintiff) No. 4 and P.W.8 P.W. 9 | ------------------------------ | | | Shyamsundar Arjun Kishorechandra (Defendant (Plaintiff (Plaintiff No. 1) No. 2) No.3) =Sakuntha Devi | | -------------------------------- | | | Ananta Ramo Achuta Ramo Abhiram (said to be taken in adopation by Shyam- sunder) Plaintiff No.1. 2. Patito Sabata was a very well-to-do person with extensive landed properties in Sasan Ambagaon and other villages in Hingilikati Police Station of Ganjam district. His eldest grandson ...
Tag this Judgment!Kali Charan Sadangi and anr. Vs. Agadhu Bhoi and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-23-1963
Reported in: AIR1964Ori211
Narasimham, C.J.1. This is a plaintiffs' appeal against the appellate judgment of the Subordinate Judge of Bolanglir allowing in part an appeal by the defendants against the judgment and decree of the Munsif of Sonepur in a redemption suit. The plaintiffs' ancestor was said to have, created an usufructuary mortgage of the disputed properties in favour of defendant No. 1. Defendants 2 to 13 are members of the same family who are also said to be interested in the mortgaged property. Defendants 14 to 20 are in possession of some portion of the suit property under defendants 1 to 13. The plaintiffs' suit was decreed in full on 29-6-1956. An appeal was preferred by defendants 1 to 13 and 20 against the decree. The Appellate Court by its order dated 14-4-1958 framed an additional issue No. 4 and remanded the suit to the Lower Court for a fresh finding on that issue. Against that order of remand the plaintiffs Bled Civil Revision No. 230 of 1958 on 30-6-1958. During the pendency of that civil...
Tag this Judgment!O. Kay Electric Company Vs. Mrs. Laxmi Devi and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-23-1963
Reported in: (1968)IILLJ323Ori
G.K. Misra, J.1. Ram Parsidh Singh Mebto was electrocuted and died on 22 March 1969. The Hindustan Steel (Private), Ltd. Rourkela, submitted a preliminary report of the accident on 33 March 1959. It was mentioned therein that the deceased was working under O. Kay Electric Company (hereinafter to be referred to as the company), and the probable cause given was accidental contact with live line, in the colums for precaution taken to prevent such accident, it was noted that the contract (the company) had been inserted in writing and several times verbally to take shut-downs in writing and work on the line only when line-clear slip is issued. On receipt of this report, the labour welfare officer of the State addressed a letter to the company. It was mentioned therein that Sri Narang, a representative of the company, had discussions with the labour welfare officer when the latter pointed out that a report in form EE of the Workmen's Compensation Act (hereinafter to be referred to as the Act...
Tag this Judgment!Madhab Mohapatra and ors. Vs. Bhikari Panda and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-20-1963
Reported in: AIR1964Ori26
S. Barman, J.1. The plaintiffs are the appellants. The suit out of which this appeal was filed by the plaintiffs as reversioners for setting aside a sale by a widow in favour of defendant No. 1 who in his own right sold the suit property to defendants Nos. 2 to 4.2. A genealogical table showing the relationship of the plaintiffs with the deceased widow is set out as follows: Sadananda | ----------------------------------- | | Govinda Dinabandhu | | Balabhadra= Jagannath Tulsi (window | (died 30-7-1957) -------------------- | | Madhab Sindhu (Plaintiff-1) (Plaintiff-2) Defendant No.1 is the purchaser from the window Tulsi. Defendants Nos. 2 to 4 are purchasers from defendant 1.3. On March 8, . 1956, Tulsi sold to defendant No. 1 (her own brother's son) the suit property for a consideration of Rs. 950/- by a registered sale deed (Ext. A). On July 30, 1957 Tulsi died. The plaintiffs' case is that on November 18, 1957 the defendants forcibly reaped away paddy crops from the suit land whic...
Tag this Judgment!Nabaghana Samal and ors. Vs. Bhagawata GossaIn and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-16-1963
Reported in: AIR1965Ori76; 30(1964)CLT112
Narasimham, C. J. 1. This is a revision against an order dated 24-2-62 passed by the Munsif of Athgarh, in Title Suit No. 17 of 1961 holding that the Civil Court's jurisdiction to decide the dispute involved in that litigation was not ousted by Section 73 of the Orissa Hindu Religious Endowments Act, 1951 thereinafter referred to as the new Act)2. The said suit was brought on behalf oftwo public deities in village Ballipur by severalmembers of the public under the provisions ofOrder 1, Rule 8, C. P. C. The principal defendantswere the marfatdars (defdts. 3 to 6) of the deities.it was alleged that they made unauthorised alienations of the properties of the deities by four registered kabalas on the 6th April 1960 in favour ofdefendant No. 1.3. The main reliefs asked for by the plaintiffs were:(i) a declaration that the alienations were illegal and should therefore be set aside;(ii) restoration to possession of all the alienated properties in favour of the plaintiff-deities. A preliminary...
Tag this Judgment!Balinki Padhano and anr. Vs. Gopakrishna Padhano and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-16-1963
Reported in: AIR1964Ori117
Narasimham, C.J.1. This is an appeal by the plaintiffs against the judgment and decree of the Additional Subordinate Judge of Berhampur decreeing a part of their claim to the disputed property to the extent of one fourth share and disallowing their claim for the remaining three-fourth share.2. The following geneological tree will show the relationship of the parties :- MAKARA PADHANO __________________________|_________________________ | | | Sadhu Ganga Baunsi _______|__________ | __________|_________ | | Gopi (adopted) | |Chintamoni Gopi (adopted) =Khiro Podhiani Biswambhar Kulamani | to Ganga ______________|______ |Balinki Plff. 1 | | Bhikari D. 4 | Scmbari D. 2 Gopal KrishnaSana Kora Plff. 2 D. 1The property in dispute admittedly belonged to Gopi whose line is now extinct, his widow also having died. It is also admitted that Gopi was the natural born son of Sadhu. According to the defendants he was taken in adoption by his uncle, Ganga sometime in 1905. The plaintiffs however challe...
Tag this Judgment!Narayan Das Alias Babua Das Vs. Parbati Dibya
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-13-1963
Reported in: AIR1964Ori51
Misra, J.1. The judgment-debtor is the appellant. Preliminary and final decrees for foreclosure were passed respectively on 20-2-1959 and 27-1-1960. In Execution Case No. 151 of 1960 in the Court of the Munsif, Puri, an application under Section 13 of the Orissa Money Lenders Act (hereinafter to be referred to as the Act) for granting instalments was filed on 21-7-60. The courts below rejected the application holding that it was not maintainable.2. The point involves a substantial question of law and needs close examination. Section 13(1) of the Act runs thus:'Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in any other law or in anything having the force of law or in any contract between the Moneylender and the person to whom the loan was advanced, the Court may, for reasons to be recorded in writing at any time, on the application of a judgment-debtor, after notice to the decree-holder, direct that the amount of any decree passed before or after the commencement of this Act, in re...
Tag this Judgment!Ghanashyam Mohapatra and ors. Vs. Suryamani Swain
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-10-1963
Reported in: AIR1964Ori205
R.K. Das, J.1. This is a decree-holders' appeal against the appellate decision of the Dist. Judge of Cutback, Dhenkanal confirming the order of the Munsif rejecting their application for execution as time-barred.2. The appellants obtained on 13-5-57 an ex parte money-decree for a sum of Rs. 2000/- against the respondent. The respondent, however, filed an application (Misc. Case No. 130/57) under Order 9, Rule 13 of the Civil Procedure Code for setting aside the ex parte decree, but the same was dismissed on 3-5-58 for default. It was however subsequently restored and again dismissed on 4-7-53. Against the said order of dismissal, the respondent carried an appeal (Misc. Appeal No. 75/59). The appellate Court on 22-3-60 directed the restoration of the aforesaid (Misc. case No. 130/57) to its file. After hearing, the Misc. case, was dismissed on 29-10-60. On 4-2-61 the present execution case was filed clearly beyond three years of the passing of the ex parte decree. The respondents resist...
Tag this Judgment!Lakshmi Charan Panda and anr. Vs. Satyabadi Behera and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-03-1963
Reported in: AIR1964Ori39
G.K. Misra, J. 1. The legal representatives of the original plaintiff are the appellants. The suit is for ejectment of the defendants from the suit site and for permanent injunction prohibiting the defendants from entering into the suit site and from proceeding with the construction of the houses. There was an allegation in the plaint that defendants 1 to 8 are the cousins of one Jagannath Behera and defendants 9 to 11 are their sworn friends, and all the defendants at the Instigation of Jagannath Behera conspired and unlawfully encroached upon the suit site.2. The defence was that the defendants are in possession and enjoyment of the suit land from the time of their ancestors and are using it for storing manure to the knowledge of the plaintiff. The suit land is a poromboke land and the defendants are not aware how the plaintiff got the suit land recorded in his name. The plaintiffs title and possession were denied.3. The Courts below negatived the plaintiff's ease holding that the pl...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Swaranamoyee Dasi Vs. Debendranath Karan
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-03-1963
Reported in: AIR1964Ori55
ORDERG.K. Misra, J.1. Defendant-Judgment-debtor is the petitioner. The opposite party decree-holder filed T.M.S. 46 of 1954 and obtained a preliminary mortgage decree for sale on 12-11-1955. An application for passing a final decree was filed on 8-1-1960. The. Court passed the final decree in the absence of the petitioner without noticing that the application was barred by limitation. In the final decree proceedings, the Court had directed issue of notice on the petitioner.Though she is a permanent resident of village Sabitrapur in the district of Midnapur in West Bengal where sheresided with her husband and though this address wasgiven in the proceeding upto the passing of the preliminary decree, with a view to keep her in dark and preventing her from objecting to the application for passingof the final decree, which was barred by time, the op-posite party took cut notices giving the address of the petitioner as village Parakhi in the district of Balasore, which is far off from Sabitr...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »