Orissa Court September 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.
Union of India (Uoi) Represented by the General Manager, Eastern Railw ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-27-1966
Reported in: AIR1967Ori148; 33(1967)CLT885
Das, J.1. This is an appeal against the decree passed by the Additional Subordinate Judge. Cuttack allowing the claim for damages in favour of the plaintiff.2. The plaintiff-respondent indented 99 bales of cotton from Messrs Rallis India Ltd.. for delivery at Charbatia Railway Station situate on the South Eastern Railways Messrs. Rallis India Ltd. handed over 99 bales of cotton in sound packing condition to the Western Railway (defendant No 1) at Gorakhpur. The said goods were booked under Invoice No. R.R. 73820 dated 21 3-59 ex-Gorakhpur toCharbatia. The railway receipt was duly endorsed in favour of the plaintiff. Out of the 99 bales 49 bales were delivered in good condition to the plaintiff at the Charbatia Railway Station on 12-4-59. The remaining fifty bales arrived at the said railway station in a different wagon on 26-4-59. These bales were found to have been partly burnt. The plaintiff demanded assessment delivery and accordingly assessment delivery certificate (Ext. 1) was giv...
Janardan Sahu Vs. Arakhit Sahu
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-23-1966
Reported in: AIR1967Ori150; 33(1967)CLT226; 1967CriLJ1354
ORDERK. Ahmad, C.J. 1. This is a case arising out of Section 22 of the Cattle Trespass Act. 1871. Thereunder the petitioner has been directed to pray Rs 40/- to the complainant and Sansari Sahu and Bula Swain owners of buffaloes towards compensation for the loss caused in releasing buffaloes and incurring cost of litigation in this case The prosecution story, as made out in the evidence and in the petition of complaint, was that on 24-8-64 Natabara Sahu and Chandra Bhuyan Halias of the complainant were tending 5 heads of buffaloes belonging to the complainants Sansari Sahu and Bula Swain in anabadi land and at that time the accused Naba, Natabara, Kunja, Duruja and Bhima arrived there and seized them from that anabadi land and decided to impound them in kine house. 'They drove the buffaloes to beat house where accused Janardan joined with them and all those accused persons drove the buffaloes to Gopalpur .Kine house and impounded them. On the next day the complainant and Sansari Sahu a...
Batahari Jena and anr. Vs. State of Orissa and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-19-1966
Reported in: AIR1968Ori44; (1969)ILLJ408Ori
Ahmad, C.J.1. These two petitions both filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India have been heard together as they involve the consideration of a common question of law as to the constitutional validity of substantially similar provisions made by the Government of India in para 6 of their office memorandum No 33/18/62-ESTS (A) in the Ministry of Home Affairs dated the 30th of November 1962 as also in Rule 56(j) of the Fundamental Rules and by the Government of Orissa in para 3 of their Political and Services Department Resolution No. 7406/Gen. dated the 21st of May 1963 in regard to premature compulsory retirement of a Government employee. In all these provisions the normal age of superannuation has been increased from 55 years to 58 years, but subject to certain conditions, one of them being that the appointing authority may require a Government servant to retire after he attains the age of 55 years on 3 months' previous notice in writing without assigning any reason. In exe...
Narendranath Mohanty Vs. Union of India (Uoi), Represented by the Gene ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-15-1966
Reported in: AIR1967Ori171; (1967)IILLJ414Ori
Misra, J.1. The plaint and the written statement bristle with numerous facts. It is unnecessary to recount them, in view of the accepted position on the basis of which the litigation can be disposed of. The common case of the parties is as follows :--2. Plaintiff was a permanent Government Servant under the defendant. On 20th of November, 1957, the defendant passed the following order (hereinafter to be referred to as the impugned order.)'It is hereby declared that as Sri N.N. Mohanty absented himself from duty continuously for more than five years, i. e from 8-3-1951 under Rule 2014 of the Indian Railway Establishment Code, he ceases to be a Railway servant in Government employ with effect from 8-3-1956. This is without prejudice to the Railways right to terminate the service of Sri N.N. Mohanty under the agreement'. This order was passed without any proceedings being drawn against the plaintiff in conformity with the provisions of Article 311(2) of the Constitution of India. The suit...
Biseswar Giri Vs. Haraprasad Behera and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-14-1966
Reported in: AIR1967Ori86; 33(1967)CLT725
G.K. Misra, J. 1. The disputed lands appertain to plot Nos. 1993, 1994 and 1995 in Sikimi Khata No. 5 in village Mahespur in the district of Balasore. These plots respectively constitute Bari, Ghar and Puruna padia with an area of 0.26, 0.10 and 0.59 acres. Advocates for the parties do not dispute that the suit lands constitute homestead within the meaning of Section 236 (1) of the Orissa Tenancy Act (hereinafter to be referred to as the Act). One Ambika Prasad Das was the Sthitiban tenant of these lands. He had two sons, Biswanath and Kshetramohan. They transferred the disputed lands to one Radhakrishna by a registered sale deed (Ex. 2) on 24-4-45. Radhakrishna sold the same by another registered document (Ex. 3) to Bhagaban Behera and his brother on 17-3-47. Bhagaban and his brother sold the disputed lands to Hadi Behera by a registered sale deed (Ex. 6) on 29-10-49. Hadi Behera sold the disputed lands by a registered sale deed (Ex. 5) to the plaintiff on 10-1-51. Plaintiff's suit is...
Laxminarayan Gupta Vs. Durgadevi Thakurani
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-14-1966
Reported in: AIR1967Ori92; 33(1967)CLT72
Misra, J.1. The disputed land was an abadi land of the landlords Manoranjan Deb and Manmathnath Deb who were brothers. Plaintiff's case is that on 5-5-44 Manmathnath Deb settled 1.98 acres of land including the disputed land in Sthitiban right on the plaintiff deity with her daughter-in-law Sm. Nandarani Debi as the marfatdar. Plaintiff constructed the suit house and has been paying rent to the landlord, and after vesting to the Anchal Defendant took the disputed house on monthly rent. One of the houses had two rooms and defendant was paying Rs. 3 as rent for that house. He was paying rent of Rs. 2/8/- for the second house having three rooms. Defendant defaulted in payment of rent from Chaitra 1930 Sal. The suit is for declaration of title and recovery of Rs. 187 as arrear of rent.The defence case is that he never took the disputed houses from the plaintiff on rent. Plaintiff's title to the disputed land and house was challenged. Defendant's positive case is that the two landlords were...
Parikhit Muduli and ors. Vs. Champa Dei and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-12-1966
Reported in: AIR1967Ori70; 33(1967)CLT944
R.K. Das, J. 1. This is an appeal by defendants 1, 2 and 3 against the affirming judgment of the Additional Subordinate Judge. Puri arising out of a suit for partition.2. Bharat had two sons. Parikhit (defendant 1) and Chakra the husband of the plaintiff Kaviraj and Gopal defendants 2 and 3 respectively are sons of Parikhit Defendants 4 and 5 are purchasers from Parikhit in respect of Kha schedule properties: Plaintiff who is governed by the Mitakhara School of Hindu Law, has filed the suit for partition of schedule Ka property claiming an allotment of eight Annas' share out of the same She further prayed for a declaration that the registered sale-deeds executed by defendant 1 on 2-1-1958 in favour of defendants 4 and 5 in respect of Kha Sch. properties and the sale-deed dated 2-12-55 executed by defendant 1 in favour of his two sons, defendants 2 and 3 in respect of Sch. Ga properties are not binding upon her, as they are not for consideration and legal necessity.3. The specific case ...
Udayanath Sahu Vs. Zilla Parishad (by Chairman) and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-06-1966
Reported in: 33(1967)CLT171; (1967)IILLJ572Ori
G.K. Misra, J.1. The petitioner was the head teacher In Manibandha upper primary school within the Jurisdiction of Panchayat Samiti, Bolgarh, In the district of Purl. Eight charges were levelled against him on 18 May 1964 by Sri C.S. Pattnayak, Chairman, Bolgarh Panchayat Samiti and the Block Development Officer. These charges broadly related to misappropriation of the funds, non-observance of the leave rules, not handing over articles as per the old stock register and gross misbehaviour towards the Sub-Inspector of schools. The petitioner submitted an explanation specifically denying the charges. The petitioner averred that no enquiry was held Into the charges without giving any reasonable opportunities to the petitioner to defend himself he was discharged from service by an order of the chairman, zilla parishad, on 27 February 1965. The order communicated by the Block Development Officer was in the following terms:Yon are discharged from services as per the order of the Chairman, Zil...
Biswanath Sahu Vs. Dasa Sahu
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-01-1966
Reported in: AIR1967Ori81
G.K. Misra, J. 1. Balaji, Dinabandhu and Kripasindhu were brothers. Balaji died leaving behind three sons, Kelai, Dasa and Binoda who died in 1928, 1917 and 1936 respectively Rukuna, Kelai's widow, died in 1942-43. After the death of Dasa, his widow Ratani remarried Binoda. She died in 1957. Dinabandhu died issueless. Lokanath and Biswanath (plaintiff) are the sons of Kripasindhu. The disputed lands are plot 701 with an area 0.02 acre in Khata No. 478 and plot 702 with an area 0.01 acre in Khata No. 270. It is the admitted case that the disputed lands belonged to Kelai and Binoda who were separate, and after their death, those were recorded in the name of Rukuna and Ratani (described as widow of Binoda). On 15-10-1949 Ratani executed a registered sale deed (Ex. A) for a consideration of Rs. 400 in favour of the defendant. Plaintiff's suit was for declaration of title, confirmation of possession and for permanent injunction on the allegation that he was the adopted son of Kelai and was ...
Narasingha Rou Vs. Sricharan Panda and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-01-1966
Reported in: AIR1967Ori182; 1967CriLJ1549
G.K. Misra, J.1. Plaintiff's suit was for declaration of title and recovery of possession Title is based on a registered sale deed (Ex. 1) dated 11-4-1956 for a consideration of Rs. 1400 executed by defendant-2 on behalf of himself and his sons and defendant-1, the mother-in-law of defendant-2. Plaintiff's case is that from the date of purchase he was in possession. In 1957 defendant-3 started a proceeding under Section 144, Cr. P. C. which ended in his favour.2. Defendants 1 and 2 supported the case of the plaintiff. Defendant-3 claimed the disputed land as his ancestral property and asserted that he and his ancestors are in possession for the last 20 years or so and that defendants 1 and 2 had no title or possession. It was further averred that the plaintiff had no possession within 12 years of the suit and in a proceeding under Section 145, Cr. P. C. between him and defendants 1 and 2, the land was delivered to him in 1952, and that no suit having been filed within three years of th...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›