Orissa Court November 1966 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.
Khageswar Karna Vs. Aduti Karnani and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Nov-05-1966
Reported in: AIR1967Ori80; 33(1967)CLT260
Barman, Ag. C.J.1. The husband-plaintiff is the appellant herein from a decision of the District Judge of Balangir-Kalahandi by which he dismissed the plaintiff's application against his wife under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act for restitution of conjugal rights. There are is many as 6 defendants in the suit, namely, defendant No. 1, the wife of the plaintiff, defendant No. 2, the adoptive father of defendant No. 1; defdts-3 and 5, the natural parents of defendant No. 1; defdt. No. 4, the brother of defendant No. 3; defendant No. 6, the wife of Ganda Patra, defdt. No. 3. The husband's suit was contested by the wife on, among other grounds, alleged impotency of the plff-husband.2. The facts briefly stated are these: The marriage took place in 1944; it is said that it was a child marriage in that plaintiff-husband was only 9 years while the wife, defendant No. 1 was only 3/4 years at the time of marriage. In 1956 there was nuptial ceremony (second marriage), four years before the s...
Jogesh Chandra Hota Vs. Bibhutibhusan Sahani and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Nov-05-1966
Reported in: AIR1967Ori95; 33(1967)CLT379
Barman, A.C.J.1. This is the plaintiffs appeal from a decision of the learned Subordinate Judge, Sambalpur by which the plaintiffs (intending purchaser) suit for specific performance of a contract executed by defendant No. 1 Bhibhutibhusan Sahani to sell the suit property a dwelling house of the defendants' family was dismissed. The other defendants in the suit are defendants 2 and 3 two widows of defendant No. 1 Bhibhutibhusan's deceased father Parsuram Sahani; defendants 4, 5 and 6 are three married daughters of the deceased Parsuram Sahani.2. The plaintiff was the owner of a house adjacent to the suit house which belonged to defendants family governed by Mitakshara School of Hindu Law. From time to time between September 9, 1956 and April 7, 1957 the plaintiff advanced loans to Parsuram Sahani and his son defendant No. 1. Bhibhutibhusan Sahani on nine several promissory notes of the total sum of Rs. 2,600/-without interest. On April 29, 1957 the plaintiff, advanced a further loan of...
Basudeo Lal Modi and ors. Vs. Madanlal Chhapolia and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Nov-05-1966
Reported in: AIR1967Ori107
Barman, Actg. C.J.1. In F. A. No. 12 of1963 defendants 7 to 12 are the appellants from the judgment of the trial court by which the plaintiffs' suit on a handnote executed by defendant No. 2 Ramkumar Modi was decreed on contest as against defendant No. 1 Noperam Ramgopal, a Hindu joint family firm and defendants 2, 3, 7 and 8 and against defendants 4 to 6 and 9 to 12--all members of the said joint family--to the extent of their interest in the joint family property with costs and dismissed ex parte without costs against the rest of the defendants as no relief was claimed against them. In F. A. No. 16 of 1963 the plaintiffs are the appellants from the decision of the trial court so as not granting pendente lite interest and proper pleader's fee on the grounds taken in the said appeal.2. The plaintiffs claim is based on a hand-note Ext. 1 dated October 10, 1949 executed by defendant No. 2 Ramkurnar Modi. The handnote is quoted as follows:'Sree Ramjee Ext. No. 1 : Noperam Ramgopal greets...
Khali Panigrahi Vs. Kamala Devi
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Nov-01-1966
Reported in: AIR1967Ori100
Barman, Ag. C.J.1. This appeal filed by the defendant arises out of a suit filed by the plaintiff-purchaser for specific performance of a contract for sale of a suit house in Berhampur (Ganjam) town under an agreement by which the defendant agreed to sell the suit house to the plaintiff for consideration on the terms and conditions as mentioned in the said agreement. The plaintiff-purchaser's suit for specific performance was decreed in her favour. Hence this appeal by the defendant-vendor. The facts and circumstances in which the parties came to be involved in the litigation over the suit house are as hereinafter stated.2. The plaintiff Srimati KamaJa Devi and the wife of the defendant, Khali Panigrahi are stated to be intimate friends. It is said that the plaintiff approached the defendant a contractor, for construction of a house for the plaintiff and members of her family; that the defendant purchased Ac. 0.05 cents of land in ward No. 24 of Berhampur Municipality being house No. 3...
Annapurna Sahuani Vs. Narendra Prasad Sahu and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Nov-01-1966
Reported in: AIR1967Ori129; 33(1967)CLT710
Misra, J.1. Annapurna (plaintiff) is the widow of Nilmoni Sahu who died on 22-7-1960. Narendra (defdt. No. 1) a minor is the natural-born son of Lokenath (defendant no. 5) and Ratnamala (defendant no. 6). Labanga (defendant no. 3) is the sister's daughter of the plaintiff and lived with her from early childnood. Anjali (defendant no. 4), a minor is the daughter of defendant no. 3. Defendant no. 2 is the deity Shri Shri Shri Radha Nilamadhaba Mahaprabhu installed by Nilmoni.2. Plaintiffs case is that the 5th defendant is a distant agnatic nephew of Nilmoni and was very intimate with him. After Nilmoni's death he looked after her affairs and wanted execution of a power-of-attorney. She is illiterate. Having no independent advice, she executed a power-of-attorney in favour of the 5th defendant on 11-8-60. From whispers in the locality, she learnt that she had parted with all her properties and had adopted the 1st defendant as her son. She procured certified copies (Exs. B, C and D) execut...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›