Orissa Court March 1974 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.
Harihar Ram and ors. Vs. Beda Ram and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-15-1974
Reported in: AIR1974Ori211
S.K. Ray, J.1. This appeal is by the plaintiffs from the confirming decision of the lower appellate court.2. Originally plaintiff No. 1 filed this suit for a declaration that defendant No. 1 has no right, title and interest over Schedule 'B' land and that the entry in the record-of-rights of 1962 settlement of defendant No. 1's name in respect of the said land is wrong and that he has right of way over the said land and for permanent injunction restraining defendant No. 1 from setting up a shop or making any kind of construction upon the said land. Subsequently, by order of the High Court passed in C.R. No. 79 of 1967 the plaintiff was allowed to amend his plaint and to convert it to a representative suit under Order 1. Rule 8, C.P.C. on behalf of the villagers of Gureipali. By amendment, the original prayer (e) of the plaint was amended and a declaration was sought that the villagers of Gureipali have right of way over Schedule 'B' land.3. Schedule 'B' land measures about A0.01 decima...
Phulchand Agrawal Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-12-1974
Reported in: AIR1975Ori110
B.N. Misra, J.1. This is an application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for a writ of certiorari to quash the revisional order passed by the Union of India (Opposite Party No. 11 in exercise of powers vested in it under Chapter VII of the Mineral Concession Rules, 1960. The dispute relates to mineral rights in graphite over an area located in the District of Bolangir. On 14-10-1961, Mediratta (Opposite Party No. 3) applied for a prospecting licence over 833.53 acres. A fee of Rs. 24/- had been paid in support of the application as against the required fee of Rs. 32/-. On 27-10-1961, he moved the Collector to accept the deficit of Rs. 8/- (vide Annexure-B). The Collector, however, wanted the State Government's orders to be obtained in the matter and made a reference. On 28-12-1961, Mediratta deposited the said amount. In the meantime, on 2-11-1961, Phulchand (petitioner) applied for a similar prospecting licence in respect of 748.16 acres. 272.40 acres were a common area ...
Brahmananda Choudhury Vs. Prahlad Panigrahi and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-11-1974
Reported in: AIR1975Ori115
ORDERP.K. Mohanti, J.1. This Civil Revision if directed against an order of the learned Munsif, Kendrapara dismissing an application under Section 151, Civil P C for amendment of the sale certificate issued Under Order 21, Rule 94, Civil P. C.2. The petitioner obtained a money decree in Money Suit No. 110 of 1968 and filed Execution Case No. 19 of 1970 for realisation of the decretal dues by attachment and sale of the immovable properties of the iudsment-debtor. Out of the five lots of immovable properties attached and advertised for sale, only lots Nos. 4 and 5 were put to sale and the petitioner purchased the same with the permission of the Court. These two lots of properties are situated at mouza Naldhalia as mentioned in the execution petition, the attachment process, the sale proclamation and the news paper. But in the sale certificate issued by the Court, the name of the mouza was wrongly mentioned as Baipada. On 20-2-1973 the petitioner filed an application under Section 151, Ci...
Binod Jena and anr. Vs. Abdul Hamid Khan and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-11-1974
Reported in: AIR1975Ori159
S.K. Ray, J. 1. This is a plaintiff's second appeal from the confirming decision of the lower appellate court. 2. They filed the suit for declaration of title in respect of the suit property comprising of 37 decimals 8 karis and 2 gandas and that the sale deeds dated 10-11-1965 (Exs. A and B) executed by defendant No. 3 for self and as guardian of minor defendants 4 and 5 in favour of defendants 1 and 2 are invalid in law and not binding upon the plaintiffs. They also prayed for confirmation of possession or in alternative, if found dispossessed, for recovery of the same. 3. Before setting out the plaintiff's case in detail it is necessary to set out the genealogy of the family to indicate the relationship between the plaintiff and defendants Nos. 3 to 9. GENEALOGY. Bidei Jena ________________________|______________________________ | | Nisakar Chuin | | Rama Hrushi (D.6) ___________|____________ ______________|______________ | | | | | Naba (D.8) Bhagat Bansi Murali Madan (D.9) =W. Ruk...
Balaram Das Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-11-1974
Reported in: [1975]36STC332(Orissa)
R.N. Misra, J.1. The petitioner is a registered dealer under the Orissa Sales Tax Act of 1947 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'), carrying on business at Remuna in the district of Balasore. He was assessed to sales tax under the Act for the years 1968-69 and 1969-70 by the opposite party No. 1.2. The assessing officer relied upon a fraud report of August, 1968, of the inspecting staff. He also found that sale of paper containers on several occasions had been shown though purchase of such containers had never been accounted for. Ten quintals of unaccounted paddy were also found in stock. The account books were found not to have been written up to date. On 24th February, 1969, it was noticed that the accounts had not been written after 1st April, 1968. There was also a shortage of kerosene oil and purchase vouchers of certain items were not available though asked for. Accordingly while completing the assessment under Section 12(2) of the Act for the two years, the assessing officer e...
State Transport Authority Vs. Banamali Dalabehera and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-05-1974
Reported in: AIR1975Ori58
B.N. Misra, J. 1. The State Transport Authority of Orissa has come before this Court for quashing of an interim order .passed by the State Transport Appellate Tribunal (opp. party No. 2) during the pendency of an appeal by the opp. party No. 1 against rejection of an application for a temporary stage carriage permit to him. Under Chapter IV-A of the Motor Vehicles Act of 1939 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) schemes of nationalisation have been framed and the routes Cuttack-Kakatpur and Cuttack-Nayahat overlapped the nationalised routes covered by the schemes. There are some old permit holders on some of these overlapping routes. Rule 65-C of the Orissa Motor Vehicles Rules. 1940 (hereinafter to be referred as the Rules) provides :-- 'The Regional Transport Authority may attach to a permit for a stage carriage or a contract carriage the condition that a Motor Vehicle in order to operate under such a permit shall not be more than 10 years' old from its year of manufacture.' The Stat...
Anadi Hati Vs. Dharamu Behera and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-05-1974
Reported in: AIR1974Ori213; 40(1974)CLT506
G.K. Misra, C.J.1. Plaintiff's case may be stated in short. Plaintiff is the owner of plot No. 1162. Defendants 1 and 2 are the owners of plot No. 1170/1623. Both the plots adjoin. Plot No. 1172 is Anabadi land and is undisputedly used as a lane. Plaintiff has his latrine in plot No. 1162. Defendants have their latrine in plot No. 1170/1623. Plaintiff's latrine is being cleaned by municipal sweepers since time immemorial. They come from Ranihat-Manglabag road through plot No. 1172 and enter plot No. 1162 through plot No. 1170/1623. Plaintiff claims right of way on the disputed passage over plot No. 1170/1623 by way of easement. The disputed passage is claimed to have been used peaceably and openly as of right without interruption for much more than twenty years. The suit was filed in 1957.Defendants 1 and 2 who contested the suit denied the existence of the right of way.The trial court dismissed the suit holding that plaintiff has acquired no right of way by easement. An appeal by the ...
Giridhari Mohapatra and ors. Vs. Raghunath Jew and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-04-1974
Reported in: AIR1975Ori60
Acharya, J. 1. Being aggrieved by exactly similar orders passed in O.E.A. Appeals Nos. 68 and 69 of 1967 (Annex-ure-4 in both the writ petitions) the petitioners have filed these two writ applications under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India praying for issue of writs in the nature of certiorari quashing the said order as per Annexure-4. The questions involved in both the writ petitions being the same they were taken up together for hearing and one set of argument was advanced by counsel appearing for all the parties. Accordingly this judgment will govern both the writ petitions. 2. The petitioners' case in both the writ petitions in short is that the lands in respect of which the impugned order (An-nexure-4) has been passed were a part of an estate and the ancestors of the petitioners purchased the same by a registered sale deed dated 11-7-1868 from the then intermediary, and ever since that time the petitioners' ancestors continued in possession of the said lands gener...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›