Orissa Court June 1969 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.
Jogi Das and ors. Vs. Fakir Panda
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jun-30-1969
Reported in: AIR1970Ori22; 35(1969)CLT939
S. Acharya, J. 1. This is an appeal by the defendants against the judgment of the 1st Addl. District Judge, Cuttack, in Title Appeal No. 146 of 1962 confirming the judgment of the First Additional Subordinate Judge, Cuttack, in Title Suit No. 214 of 1959.2. The plaintiffs suit, in short, was for declaration of title and confirmation of possession or in the alternative for recovery of possession in respect of 4 decimals 5 Kadis of land out of plot No. 620 and also for a permanent injun-ction restraining the defendants from interfering with the plaintiff's possession of the aforesaid portion of the land. The plaintiff also claimed damages for Rupees 300/- and a direction on the defendants to demolish a certain construction. He claimed title to the disputed land on the basis of a compromise entered into between himself and defendants 3 and 4 and one Svamsundar Das (since dead) in a previous suit (T. S. No. 170/42 of 1955-57 in the Court of the 1st Munsif at Cuttack). The defendants contes...
Shyamasundar Kar Vs. the State
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jun-27-1969
Reported in: 1969CriLJ1310
ORDERS.K. Ray, J.1. This is an appeal from the judgment of conviction and sentence dated 8th October, 1966, passed by Sri U.N.Misra. Additional Sessions Judge. Ganjam-Boudh, in Sessions case No. 20 of 1966 (G) by which the sole appellant has been convicted under Section366, I.P.C., and sentenced to undergo R. I. for four years and to pay a fine ofRs. 100/- in default to undergo R. I. for further term of one month.2. The charge against him runs as follows:-That you, on or about the month of August, 1964, abducted Purification Naik with intent that she may be seduced to illicit intercourse or knowing it to be likely that she will be seduced to illicit intercourse and thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 366 of the Indian Penal Code and within my cognizance and I hereby direct that you be tried by this Court on the said charge.3. The prosecution story runs as follows:-The appellant was a teacher in L. P. School at Khariguda Village at about the same time when the complain...
Jagabandhu Sahu Vs. State of Orissa Represented by Commr. of Sales Tax
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jun-26-1969
Reported in: AIR1969Ori299; 35(1969)CLT817; [1969]24STC240(Orissa)
G.K. Misra, C.J.1. The Sales Tax Tribunal has referred the following question under Section 24(1) of the Orissa Sales Tax Act for the opinion of the High Court:'Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, ginger is not a vegetable according to the test as finally settled by the Supreme Court.''Vegetables' are not taxable under the Orissa Sales Tax Act. If ginger is vegetable, it is not taxable. This is how the question gathers importance.2. The Tribunal has found that ginger is not vegetable. Its view is based on ILR (1961) Cut 175, Dhadi Sahu v. Commissioner of Sales Tax, Orissa, in paragraph 8 their Lordships laid down the following test:'On the basis of those decisions one can safely find that 'vegetables' would cover only such plants which are grown in the kitchen garden and cultivated for the purpose of food. In other words vegetables shall include such plants, roots, etc. which are primarily used for the purpose of food. The description of the word 'vegetable' as appears ...
Jogendra Garabadu and ors. Vs. Lingaraj Patra and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jun-24-1969
Reported in: AIR1970Ori91; 35(1969)CLT835; 1970CriLJ819
A. Misra, J.1. The unsuccessful plaintiffs are the appellants. Originally, the suit was instituted by 12 plaintiffs, but as plaintiff No. 5 died during the pendency of the suit, his name was expunged and the remaining 11 plaintiffs continued the suit.2. Plaintiffs' case, in brief, is as follows: They are all members of the Brahmin Nijjog whose office is situate on plot No. 738 adjoining a tea stall owned by defendant No. 1 on plot No. 737. Defendant No. 1 had cherished a grudge against them on their refusal to allow him some further space to expand his tea stall. During the night preceding 31-10-58, the roof of defendant No. 1's tea stall was burnt. On the morning of 31-10-1958 out of the grudge which he cherished against the plaintiffs, defendant no, 1 conspired with defendants Nos. 2 to 4 and lodged a F. I, E. making false accusations against the members of the Brahmin Nijjog including the plaintiffs of having committed certain offences in relation to him and his property while he wa...
Sriram Chandra Das Vs. Krushna Chandra Roy
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jun-24-1969
Reported in: 35(1969)CLT788; 1970CriLJ264
S.K. Ray, J.1. This is an appeal preferred by the complainant against the order of so. quittal passed by Sri P.C. Patro. Judicial Magistrate, second class, Cuttack on 21-1-66 in complaint case No. 259 C-1/64.2. The prosecution case is that the complainant was called to the shop of the accused through the latter's son on 27-8-64 at 11 a. m. When he reached the shop the accused suddenly flared up and abused him in filthy language. The words of abuse need by the accused have been quoted both in the complaint petition and also in the judgment of the trial Court. After abuse, the accused rushed towards the complainant and threatened him with assault. A gentleman of the locality intervened and the matter subsided. On these allegations charges under Sections 504 and 852 were framed against the accused.3. The trial Court has found as a fact, which is no longer in dispute, that the accused has got a shop and the complainant was abused. The motive as stated in the complaint petition has been sou...
Prithiviraj Pailo Vs. Kautuka Babi
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jun-23-1969
Reported in: AIR1970Ori4
S.K. Ray, J. 1. This is an appeal preferred by the judgment-debtor from the decree of the District Judge, Jeypore, dated 17-12-65 passed in Civil Misc. Appeal No. 2/63 reversing the order of the Subordinate Judge, Jeypore, dated 19-12-64, and rejecting the objection of the judgment-debtor appellant made under Section 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure in an execution proceeding (E. P. No. 54/64), levied by the decree-holder for executing her decree for maintenance. 2. To understand the implications of the points raised in this appeal, it is necessary to recount in brief the historical background of the litigation leading to the execution proceeding started by the respondent in E. P. No. 54/64. 3. One Bikram Raj had four issues. The first two issues were sons by name Prithwiraj and Ramakrishna. The last two issues were daughters by name Nak-hyatramala Babi and Kautuka Babi. Upon the death of Bikramraj, Ramakri-shna filed a partition suit, T. S. 8/55 against Prithwiraj as defendant 1 in t...
Hadu Parida Vs. Sana Gobinda Misra
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jun-23-1969
Reported in: AIR1970Ori32
S.K. Ray, J.1. This is a plaintiffs second appeal against the reversing judgment dated 31-3-64 passed by Sri G. Panda, Additional Subordinate Judge in Title Appeal No, 39/64 (T. A. No. 119/61 G. D. C.).2. The plaintiff filed Title Suit No. 2/59 in the Court of Munsif, Aska, for declaration of right, title and interest in respect of 10 Bharanams of suit-land fully described in the plaint schedule and for an injunction restraining the defendant from taking delivery of possession of the same in execution of the decree passed in T. M. S. No. 158/50 of the court of Munsif. Aska. or in the alternative for recovery of possession of the same, if it is found that the suit-lands have been delivered to the defendant on 9-12-58 in pursuance of the execution of the decree in T. M. S. No. 158/50.3. Originally there wore 1.2 items of property enumerated, in the plaint, schedule. The defendant joined issue only with regard to items 1, 6, 7 and 8 of the schedule covered by survey Nos. 945 and 557 compr...
Pitambar Pradhan and ors. Vs. State
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jun-23-1969
Reported in: 35(1969)CLT749; 1970CriLJ641
ORDERS. Acharya, J.1. This revision application is against the order of the Sessions Judge, Balasore, affirming in appeal, by slightly modifying, the order of the Magistrate to furnish security under Section 118 Cr. P. C., only with respect to these four petitioners.2. The first point urged by Mr. Roy on behalf of the petitioners was that both the courts were wrong in taking into consideration extraneous matters which were not the subject-matter of the notice. There is nothing in Section 117 Cr. P. Code to support Mr. Roy's contention, Rather the words 'to take such further evidence as may appear necessary' in Sub-section (1) of Section 117 Cr. P. Code indicate that the Magistrate may take further evidence relating to other incidents, and need not confine himself only to the subject-matter of the notice issued to the persons proceeded against. Consideration of such other matters may enable the Magistrate to form his opinion that it is necessary to require such delinquents to execute th...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›