Orissa Court February 1965 Judgments
Biswanath Naik and ors. Vs. Jaharali Khan and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Feb-26-1965
Reported in: AIR1966Ori29
G.K. Misra, J.1. Narahari Mohapalra defen dant 4) was the occupancy Dhulibhag tenant of an area of 3.278 acres of land in khala No. 231 under Touzi No. 5689 in village Gothada (see C. S. record of rights of the year 1929, Ext H.) Though he was liable to pay Dhulibhag rent, he under separate arrangement will the then landlords commuted it to cash rental of Rs. 15-4-0 and used to pay cash rents and obtain receipts. He transferred 410 and 200 decimals of land in plot No. 961 under the aforesaid Khata by two registered Kabalas (Exts. 3/c and 3/b) dated 5-4-1937 and 18-10-1938 for Rs. 200 and Rs. 100 respectively in favour of Jabarali and Gaharali who were plaintiffs in Title Suit No. 216 of 1953 out of which second appeal No. 276 of 1963 arises. The lands covered by Exts. 3/c and 3/b are respectively mentioned in Schedules A and A-1 of the plaint. Narahari transferred .280 decimals of land from the same plot by a registered Kabala (Ext. 3/a) dated 18-10-1938 for a consideration of Rs. 100 ...
Tag this Judgment!Dula Dei Vs. Krupasindhu Patnaik
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Feb-23-1965
Reported in: AIR1966Ori5; 1966CriLJ38
ORDERR.K. Das, J. 1. The petitioner is the Second party in a proceeding under Section 145 Cr. P. C. The dispute relates to 8 90 acres of Jagir lands in the Ex state of Khandapara given to one Satyabadi Champati Ray for performance of obsequial duties after the death of the Raja of Khandapara. Satyabadi had two sons, Bairagi and Laxman. The petitioner is the daughter of Laxman and the opposite party is the son of Bairagi. After the death of Satyabadi, Bairagi and Laxman amicably divided the property and both were recorded as holders of the said Jagir. After merge! of the State, the petitioner-second party made an application to be recorded as an occupancy tenant in respect of the share of her father Laxman and by order dated 16-12-1964 in Jagir Case No. 192/49-50, her name was so recorded in place of her father, and after notice she was paying rent as an occupancy tenant. On 23-12-1961, another brother of the opposite party filed a suit (O. S. 233/61) for bare declaration of title to th...
Tag this Judgment!Sadananda Mohapatra Vs. State
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Feb-17-1965
Reported in: AIR1967Ori49; (1965)ILLJ510Ori
Barman, J. 1. The main point which gives rise to this petition for writ by a Government servant is: Can adverse remarks in a Government servant's confidential character roll be used for inflicting punishment on him without giving him a reasonable opportunity to explain? 2. The petitioner was from 1955 to 1982 an Inspector of Commercial Taxes who after departmental enquiry on a charge of: having taken illegal gratification from a dealer, was reverted to the rank of a Head Clerk of the Range Office by an order made by the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes. 3. On a complaint by a certain dealer Sri Tarachand Agarwalla of Titilagarh and the report of the Vigilance Department that the petitioner had demanded illegal gratification from the said dealer and that the petitioner had obtained supply of rice from a dealer without payment, the petitioner was served with a notice dated September 24, 1960 to show cause why he should not be adequately punished on account of the charges mentioned in the...
Tag this Judgment!Bisweswar Misra and anr. Vs. Swetakumar Panigrahi and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Feb-09-1965
Reported in: 1966CriLJ494
ORDERG.K. Misra, J.1. Anupama, petitioner No. 2 is the daughter of Bisweswar, petitioner No. 1. She was married to Premananda Panigrahi, son of Swetakmnar Panigrahi (opposite party No. 1) on 23rd November, 1962. On 6-5-1964, 16-5-64 and 11.6-64, opposite party No. I filed three applications before Dhruba Charon Das (opposite party No. 2) who is the Sarpanch of Kaintragarh Gram Panchayat alleging uneasily and immorality against Anupama and asking for an enquiry as to whether she was at her father's place or had gone away to other places on certain dates. The-ultimate relied sought was to give a certified copy of the report of enquiry to opposite party No. 1. Opposite patty No. 2 entertained the applications and directed enquiries into the allegations. Petitioner No. 1 protested against such enquiry as affecting the reputation of his daughter and himself and requested that if at all an enquiry was to be made it should be done in camera at the residence of the Sarpanch and not in public s...
Tag this Judgment!Balunki Pradhan Vs. Benudhar Pradhan and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Feb-08-1965
Reported in: AIR1967Ori30
S. Barman, J.1. This appeal arises out of a suit filed by the plaintiff for partition. The defence contention is that there was previous partition and that assuming that there was no partition, all the properties are not included in this suit for partition nor were the purchasers from the joint family impleadcd. Both the Courts below found that there was no previous partition of the suit properties and decreed the plaintiff's suit accordingly for partition.2. The material facts are these : Sanatan and Ananda were two brothers. Sanatan died leaving him surviving his widow defendant No. 5 Maguni and three sons, namely, plaintiff Benudhar, Defendant No. 3 Pira and minor defendant No. 4 Panchu. Sanatan's brother Ananda also died leaving him surviving his widow defendant No. 2 Labanya and son defendant No. 1 Balanki who is the appellant in this second appeal. The main reliefs prayed for in paragraph 7 of the plaint are these :(a) The properties mentioned in Schedule 'A' be partitioned by ma...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›