Orissa Court April 1978 Judgments
B. Sitaram Rao and ors. Vs. Bibhisano Pradhan
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Apr-28-1978
Reported in: AIR1978Ori222; 46(1978)CLT7
R.N. Misra, J.1. Defendants have carried this appeal against the reversing judgment and decree of the learned Subordinate Judge of Parlakhemundi in a suit for declaration of title, confirmation of possession and other consequential reliefs.2. According to the plaintiff, the disputed property which is an acre of land originally belonged to defendant No. 1, On 19-3-1964, defendant No. 1 entered into an agreement (Ext. 1) with the plaintiff for sale of six acres of land --three acres of cultivable land and three acres of podor land -- for a total consideration of Rs. 3,300/- out of which Rs. 1,200/- was paid by way of part payment and it was stipulated that the document would be registered within two months on payment of the balance consideration. The property was then under a mortgage and by arrangement with the mortgagee, plaintiff was put in possession of the property covered by the agreement of sale. Defendant No. 1 avoided to complete the deal. Subsequently plaintiff found out that d...
Tag this Judgment!The State of Orissa Vs. Laxminarayan Lal
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Apr-25-1978
Reported in: 45(1978)CLT638; [1979]43STC364(Orissa)
R.N. Misra, J.1. The State of Orissa, defendant in a title suit, has carried this appeal against the reversing judgment and decree of the learned Additional District Judge of Dhenkanal.2. The plaintiff instituted the suit on 26th June, 1974, asking for declaration that an assessment made under the Orissa Sales Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') and the acceptance of the requisition for realisation of the assessed tax and penalty by the certificate officer were without jurisdiction, illegal and inoperative and the amount for which the certificate proceeding had been initiated was not collectible from him. The plaintiff alleged that he carried on business in cotton cloth and was a registered dealer under the provisions of the Act and had been assigned registration number CU-II/ 1948. For the quarter ending 31st December, 1957, he had duly submitted his return along with evidence showing payment of admitted tax. No order of assessment or notice of demand as provided in Section...
Tag this Judgment!Republic of India Vs. Hadibandhu Das
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Apr-20-1978
Reported in: 45(1978)CLT657; 1979CriLJ303
R.N. Misra, J.1. This appeal under Section 378 of the Cr.P.C. is directed against the appellate judgment of the learned Special Judge, Puri, setting aside the conviction of the respondent under Rule 132 (3) of the Defence of India Rules, 1962, by the Special Magistrate, Orissa, at Bhubaneswar.2. Respondent is an excise vendor and has has place of residence as also business within the Mangalabag area of the Town of Cuttack. The Deputy Superintendent of Police, C.B.I. (Economic Offences Wing) at Calcutta (P.W. 1) obtained a search warrant (Ext. 2) from the Additional District Magistrate (Judicial), Puri, authorising search of the premises of the respondent and his brother in connection with a case under Section 9 of the Opium Act. In execution of Ext. 2, the respondent's premises were searched on 6-5-1965 and during search the Inspector (P.W. 74) recovered small coins of different denominations from several places of the residential building along (From order of V. Gopalaswamy, Dist. and...
Tag this Judgment!State of Orissa Vs. Bhagabat Mahanta and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Apr-10-1978
Reported in: 46(1978)CLT23; 1978CriLJ1566
R. N. Misra, J.1. This appeal at the instance of the State of Orissa has been filed under Section 378(1) of the Cr. P.C. against the judgment of acquittal passed by the learned Sessions Judge of Mayurbhanj-Keonjhar,2. Shortly stated, the prosecution case was that Kusa, the deceased and his sons (P. Ws. 3 and 5) had cleaved a piece of Government land in Sunarinali Chaka over which bushes had grown on 11th and 12th of Sept. 1974 On 14th of Sept. 1974, in the morning, these three people along with P. W. 4, a Samandhi of Kusa came with four ploughs, ploughed the land and sowed coolthy seeds. At that time the accused persons 'together with four or five labourers were ploughing a neighbouring plot of land belonging to Government. After some time Kusa found that his stock of seeds was exhausted and, therefore, he went home to get some more seeds. During his absence, accused Basudeb accompanied by some of his men entered into the plot cleared by Kusa and his sons and started reploughmg it and ...
Tag this Judgment!The Orissa State Electricity Board and anr. Vs. Pyari Mohan Patnaik an ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Apr-07-1978
Reported in: AIR1978Ori190; 46(1978)CLT103
S. Acharya, J.1. The unsuccessful defendants in both the courts below have preferred this appeal.2. The plaintiffs' suit is for mandatory injunction against the defendants directing the latter to remove the electric poles and electric lines fixed by them on and over the plaintiffs' land.3. The plaintiffs' case, in short, is that plot No. 108 under Khata No. 119 of mouza Jagamara and plot No. 6 under Khata No. 238 of mouza Dum Duma described in the suit plan Ext. 1 attached to the plaint belong to the plaintiffs. Those plots are included in the Town Planning Scheme as per Ext. 6 and the plaintiffs had reserved the same for construction of residential buildings. The defendants framed schemes for transmission of electric lines for distribution of electricity, and under the said scheme the electric line was not to pass over the plaintiffs' lands. But to their surprise the defendants started fixing the electric poles on the suit lands and placed electric lines over the same completely disre...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›