Orissa Court February 1972 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.
Gopilal Agarwal Vs. State of Orissa and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Feb-02-1972
Reported in: AIR1973Ori15; 38(1972)CLT337
G.K. Misra, C.J. 1. The petitioner's case may be stated in short. The petitioner is a partner of Messrs. Golabrai Madumal, a partnership firm registered under the Indian Partnership Act, 1932, which owns a Gudakhu factory known as Bharat Mata Gudakhu Factory, having its place of business in Choudhury Bazar in the City of Cuttack, which manufactures and sells a particular kind of lobacco locally known as Gudakhu. The Gudakhu manufactured by the peti-tioner-firm is either chewed or rubbed against the teeth for its narcotic effect. It is a tobacco product containing tobacco powder, time, molasses and red ochre (Geru Mali). In the rejoinder the proportion of the various constitutents of Gudakhu is given as 1 kg of tobacco powder, 2 kg. of molasses, 150 grains of time and 50 grams of red ochre. A letter (Annexure 1) dated 31st of August, 1971, was addressed by the Drugs Controller and Director of Health and Family Planning Services, Orissa, to the President, Orissa Gudakhu Manufacturer's As...
Sadhob Bhotra Vs. Hori Bhotra
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Feb-01-1972
Reported in: AIR1973Ori21; 38(1972)CLT369
R.N. Misra, J. 1. The plaintiff is in appeal against the reversing decision of the learned Additional Subordinate Judge, Jey-pore. The plaintiff had sued for title and recovery of possession of the disputed property upon ejectment of the defendant therefrom. The disputed property admittedly belonged to one Hori Bhotra and his brother Arjuna who happen to be sons of one Phagunu Bhotra. Hari and Arjuna had previously mortgaged the disputed property with one Jhitru. The land was thereafter again mortgaged and it was sold to the plaintiff for a consideration of rupees four hundred under a registered sale deed dated 8th of March, 1965. The plaintiff redeemed the mortgage and obtained possession. There was a proceeding under Section 145, Code of Criminal Procedure which terminated in favour of the defendant Hence the suit. The defendant claimed that he had purchased the disputed property from Hari and his brother for Rs. 140/- in cash and five putties of paddy in kind in 1956 and was cultiva...
Lokanath Padhan Vs. Birendra Kumar Sahu
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Feb-01-1972
Reported in: AIR1973Ori60
ORDERR.N. Misra, J.1. This application under Section 100(1) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 (hereinafter referred to as me Act) seeks to challenge the election of the respondent to the Orissa Legislative Assembly from the Melchhamunda Constituency of the district of Sambalpur.2. The last date for filing of nomination papers was 7-2-1971. Nomination papers were scrutinised on 9-2-1971. Objection was raised to the acceptance of the nomination paper of the respondent on the ground that he was disqualified under Section 9A of the Act. The Returning Officer overruled the objection and accepted the nomination paper of the respondent. Election was held on 5-3-1971 and the result of election was announced on 11-3-1971 declaring the respondent as duly elected. The election petition was Bled on 20-4-1971 challenging the election of the respondent on the ground that he was disqualified from being chosen as a member of the Legislative Assembly.3. In paragraph 2 of the election petiti...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›