Orissa Court December 1971 Judgments
Kirtan Sahu After Him Uma Sahuani and ors. Vs. Thakur Sahu and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Dec-24-1971
Reported in: AIR1972Ori158; 38(1972)CLT82
R.N. Misra, J.1. When this appeal came up for disposal before a Division Bench, the admissibility of the electoral rolls prepared under the Representation of the People Act arose for consideration. A Division Bench of this Court in (1970) 36 Cut LT 1211 (Paramananda Sahu v. Babu Sahu) had taken the view that such electoral rolls were not admissible in evidence under Section 35 of the Evidence Act. In three other cases the same view had also been taken. As the Division Bench in seisin of this First Appeal was of the view that the earlier Bench decision of this Court did not correctly decide the question the following point has been formulated and referred for the opinion of the Full Bench under Rule 3 of Chapter V of the Orissa High Court Rules, Volume I:'Whether the electoral roll prepared under the Representation of the People Act is inadmissible in evidence without the author thereof and the person supplying the information being examined in the case.'2. Section 35 of the Evidence Ac...
Tag this Judgment!Rajkishore Mohanty and anr. Vs. Kangali Moharana and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Dec-20-1971
Reported in: AIR1972Ori119
Patra, J.1. This is an appeal against an order of the First Additional Subordinate Judge. Cuttack setting aside an order of the Munsif. Jaipur dismissing an application under Section 47 of the C. P. C. (hereinafter referred to as the Code) filed by the judgment-debtors. The facts of the case may be set down in chronological order as follows:4- 5-1950-Suit tiled by the appellants for possession was dismissed by the Munsif.11-12-1951-Appellate Court set aside the judgment of the trial Court and decreed the suit with costs.10- 4-1954-First Execution Case No. 158 of 1954 filed by the decree holder for recovery of possession and costs.27-11-1956-Second Appeal filed by the judgment debtor respondents dismissed by the High Court.28- 2-1958-Second Execution Case No. 72 of 1958 filed. 5- 4-1958-Execution Case (No. 72/58) dismissed.25-12-1960-Judgment debtor No. 7 on his behalf and on behalf of all judgment debtors is alleged to have paid Rs. 5/- to the decree-holder towards the decree.14- 8-196...
Tag this Judgment!Digambar Pradhan Vs. Arjuna Pradhan
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Dec-07-1971
Reported in: AIR1972Ori265
G.K. Misra, C.J.1. The petitioner and the opposite party contested for the Sarpanchship of Tileswar Grama Panchayat. The election took place on 2-6-1970. The petitioner's case is that the results were published on 11-6-1970 and he was declared to be duly elected. The petitioner secured 1157 votes while the opposite party secured 1126 votes. There was thus a difference of 31 votes. The opposite party filed an application for inspection and recounting of the rejected ballot papers. The Munsif, Boudh allowed the opposite party's application and directed inspection and recounting of the rejected ballot papers. It is against this order dated 4-1-1971 that this writ application has been filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution.2. Mr. Patnaik for the petitioner contends that the opposite party did not plead the necessary material facts justifying the prayer for inspection and recounting. He refers to paragraph 10 of the election petition which runs thus:--'That about 100 valid vot...
Tag this Judgment!Uchab Chandra Das Vs. Khirod Ch. Das and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Dec-03-1971
Reported in: 38(1972)CLT100; 1972CriLJ1148
ORDERA. Misra, J.1. This revision has been filed against an interlocutory order of the learned Magistrate. 1st Class. Cut-tack directing attachment of the property in a proceeding under Section 147 Cr. P.C.2. At the instance of opp. party Nos. 1 and 2. proceedings under Section 144 Cr. P.C. were initiated against the petitioner and registered as Misc. Case No. 148 of 1971 by the Sub-divisional Officer and Magistrate, 1st Class. Cut-tack. On the application of the 2nd party members, a local inspection was conducted by the Magistrate. 1st Class in the presence of the parties and as the 2nd party claimed a right of user of the land for the purpose of worshipping a deity installed thereon, the proceeding under Section 144 was converted to one under Section 147 Criminal P.C.. the learned Magistrate being satisfied that 'a dispute likely to cause breach of the peace exists between the parties in regard to the right of user of the land' and parties were called upon to file their respective wr...
Tag this Judgment!Hirakud Automobiles Vs. Sales Tax Officer and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Dec-02-1971
Reported in: [1973]30STC140(Orissa)
G.K. Misra, C.J.1. The petitioners are sub-dealers in jeeps, pick-ups and trailers of M/s. Mahindra & Mahindra Limited under the Hirakud Motors, Sambalpur, who are the main dealers. The petitioners purchased jeeps and pick-ups for the period 1st April, 1966, to 31st March, 1967, from the Hirakud Motors (opposite party No. 6) without payment of tax, and for the said sum furnished declarations. The petitioners now say that they were not aware of Rule 93-A of the Orissa Sales Tax Rules which came into force on 14th May, 1963, and though the said purchases were not taxable, wrongly tax had been paid. Even the department itself was ignorant of the rule and was all through taxing the petitioners without taxing the Hirakud Motors. Subsequently, the department issued notice on 4th August, 1969, to the opposite party No. 6 for reopening the assessment for the year 1966-67 in respect of the identical transactions. On 16th October, 1969, an order of assessment was passed against the opposite part...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›