Orissa Court August 1978 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.
Harmohan Senapati Vs. Smt. Kamala Kumari Senapati and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-29-1978
Reported in: AIR1979Ori51; 46(1978)CLT545
N.K. Das, J.1. Defendant No. 1 is the appellant against a confirming decision. The case of the plaintiff is that she and defendant No. 1 are husband and wife and their marriage took place in 1958 according to Hindu rites. After she gave birth to a child, defendant No. 1 drove her out of his house. Subsequently, without dissolution of her marriage with defendant No, 1, the latter married defendant No. 2 on 8-2-66 and started living with her. So, she has prayed for a declaration that the marriage of defendant No. 1 with defendant No. 2 is null and void.Defendant No. 2 did not contest, nor appeared in Court. Defendant No. 1 in his written statement contends that he has no connection with defendant No. 2 and the allegation of second marriage is not true. According to him, plaintiff left his residence to her parents' house in 1964 against his will and did not return in spite of several requests and when plaintiff came to know that defendant No. 1 was intending to file a case for judicial se...
Gangadhar Sahu and ors. Vs. Akhapati Ram Murty Patro and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-29-1978
Reported in: AIR1979Ori66; 46(1978)CLT577
R.N. Misra, J.1. This is an application for a writ, of certioran at the instance of the landlords and is directed against the affirming appellate order of the Additional District Magistrate (Judicial) (opposite party No. 11) upholding the rejection of the petition for eviction of the opposite parties 1 to 9 series.2. The disputed house is situated in the town of Berhampur and once upon a time constituted the joint asset of atrading family of Nimakhandi, Title Suit No. 23 of 1943 in the Court of the Subordinate Judge at Berhampur was filed for partition of the joint family assets. On 13-5-1958, a partial final decree was passed in which inter alia the disputed house fell to the share of the petitioners. In Execution Petition No. 16 of 1961, the decree-holders asked for possession of the properties including the house and their application was resisted by opposite parties 1 to 5 and some others. As possession of the house had not been obtained when the execution petition was dismissed on...
Babaji Charan Sahu Vs. Netrananda Sahu and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-17-1978
Reported in: AIR1979Ori71; 46(1978)CLT568
R.N. Misra, J.1. Defendant No. 1 in a suit for partition has carried this appeal against the affirming judgment and decree of the learned Subordinate Judge.2. Plaintiff filed the suit on 17-12-1973 in the court of the Munsif at Anandapur alleging that Abhimanyu Sahu died leaving behind him four sons, namely, Bikala, Gananath (defendant No. 2), Raghu and Netrananda (plaintiff). Bikala is dead and his son Babaji is defendant No. 1. Raghu died leaving his widow (defendant No. 3) and two daughters, namely, Hadiani and Paluni. plaintiff demanded his share in the joint family properties and as defendants have not partitioned the same in spite of demand, he instituted the suit asking for one-fourth share in the property. In the plaint he valued the entire property at Rs. 12,000/- and his one-fourth share at Rs. 3,150/- though on the total valuation of Rs. 12,000/- the one-fourth share should have been calculated at Rs. 3,000/-net (see para 8 of the plaint).3. Paras. 4 and 5 of the written sta...
Radhika Charan Banerjee Vs. Sambalpur Municipality and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-17-1978
Reported in: AIR1979Ori69; 46(1978)CLT404
S.K. Ray, C.J.1. The petitioner obtained lease of Nazul plot No. 1434/11 measuring Ac. 0.06d. from the Collector of Sambalpur for the purpose of construction of a house subject to the condition that he should complete construction of his house within three years from the date of the lease, i.e., 14-9-68. Within the stipulated period, the petitioner made an application to the Executive Officer, Sambalpur Municipality with a blue print plan of his proposed building and after obtaining necessary sanction and approval of his plan, completed his building. In due course the building was allotted a holding number and was assessed to municipal tax. The petitioner is paying holding tax and other taxes with effect from 1-1-1972.2. On 21-10-74 the petitioner received a notice from opposite party No. 2 that the latter accompanied by the Municipal Engineer would make a joint inspection of his building on account of an objection filed by one R.K. Biswal D/-3-5-74, that the petitioner had, in constru...
Ch. Seetharam Swamy, Etc. Vs. A. Satyanarayana and ors. Etc.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-17-1978
Reported in: AIR1979Ori74; 46(1978)CLT415
B.N. Misra, J.1. Petitioner in O. J. C. 634 of 1977 is opposite party No. 3 in the connected writ application. He is admittedly owner of about 71/2 acres of land in village Chakaguda of Rayagada area in the district of Koraput. Opposite party No. 1 in O. J. C. 634 of 1977 made an application purporting to be under Section 36-A of the Orissa Land Reforms Act (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') to the Revenue Officer of Rayagada which came to be registered as O. L. R. Case No. 10 of 1976. Therein an application was made on 5-4-1976 for appointment of a receiver. On behalf of the owner, it was contended that in a proceeding under Section 36-A of the Act there was no provision for appointment of a receiver. The Revenue Officer clearly indicated that there was no application under Section 15 of the Act and prayer for appointment of receiver by invoking Sub-section (7) of Section 15 thereof could not be made. He accordingly rejected the application. The applicant under Section 36-A of the...
industrial Development Corporation of Orissa Ltd. Vs. Jajodia Overseas ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-16-1978
Reported in: AIR1979Ori1; 46(1978)CLT623
ORDERN.K. Das, J.1. This is a petition under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure challenging the order dated 28-2-1978 passed by the learned Subordinate Judge, Bhubaneswar in Misc. Case No. 250 of 1975 under Section 33 of the Arbitration Act arising out of Original Suit No. 6 of 1972 (I). The opposite party entered into an agreement with the petitioner for supply of M.S. rounds. There is a clause in the agreement providing reference of all disputes to the Chief Secretary of Orissa. As dispute arose and the named arbitrator did not decide the same, application was filed by the present opposite party on 10-2-72 under Section 20 of the Arbitration Act for reference of the dispute to the arbitrator. This application was registered as O.S. No. 6/72 (I). After hearing, the application was allowed and the dispute was referred to the arbitrator. The arbitrator passed award on 24-9-75 and after due notice to the parties, the award was filed by the arbitrator in Court along with the relev...
Ghanashyam Das and ors. Vs. Muralidhar and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-16-1978
Reported in: AIR1979Ori76; 46(1978)CLT368
N.K. Das, J.1. Defendants Nos. 1, 15 and 16 are the appellants here against an order under Order 39, Rule 1, C. P. C. Respondent No. 4 filed a suit for declaration of title, confirmation of possession, in the alternative for recovery of possession and also alternatively for partition and allotment of 'A' schedule property. Defendants 1 to 3 are the sons of one Mansaram, since deceased: Plaintiff claims as the widow of said Mansaram and her claim is based on a deed of gift and a will executed by Mansaram in her favour. After filing of the suit, plaintiff prayed for injunction restraining defendant No. 3 from collecting rent from the persons who have stacked logs of wood at Mangalabag, Cuttack. It is stated that all the defendants except defendant No. 3 have stacked wood on the land at Mangalabag which is a part of the suit property and defendant No. 3 has been collecting rent from them. She prayed that defendant No. 3 should be restrained from collecting rent from those persons. The tri...
Madhusudan Saha and anr. Vs. State
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-16-1978
Reported in: 46(1978)CLT430; 1979CriLJ747
ORDERS. Acharya, J.1. The petitioners stand convicted under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'), for violating the provisions of clause 3 of the Orissa Declaration of Stocks and Prices of Essential Commodities Order, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Order') by not declaring, as required under the Order, the stock position of cycle tyres and tubes in their shop in Baripada town. They have been sentenced thereunder to undergo R.I. for one month and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/-each, in default to undergo R.I. for a period of one month more.2. The prosecution case, in short, is that on 4-7-1975 P.Ws. 1 to 3 (three Inspectors of the local Supply Department) inspected the shop of the petitioners, and on verification of the stock of the essential commodities in that shop they found that there were 41 cycle tyres and 76 tubes of different brands in that shop, but the petitioners had not displayed any list indicating the said stock in that ...
Anand Padhan and ors. Vs. Dhuba Mohanty and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-11-1978
Reported in: AIR1979Ori5; 46(1978)CLT483
R.N. Misra, J.1. Plaintiffs, plaintiff No. 1 being the father of the remaining plaintiffs, have carried this appeal against the judgment and decree of the learned Additional Subordinate Judge of Berhampur dismissing their suit for declaration of title as occupancy tenants under the State Government.2. They filed the suit on 11-3-1967 alleging that the disputed property was Darmilla Paik Service Inam lands of the Surangi Estate and the same has been abolished under the provisions of the Orissa Estates Abolition Act (hereinafter referred to as the 'Abolition Act'). Ancestors of defendants 1 to 7 were raiyats under the Estate with occupancy right over the disputed property. With respect to malevaram right of the disputed lands, the Zamindars of Surangi created Inams in favour of the defendants' ancestors for rendition of personal service. Nominal quit rent (Kathubadi) had, however, been fixed. The Inam-holders i.e. predecessors of defendants were thus enjoying the Kudivaram as also the Ma...
Hrudananda Patra and anr. Vs. Revenue Divisional Commissioner Central ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-10-1978
Reported in: AIR1979Ori13
S. Acharya, J.1. The facts in both these two writ petitions are similar and the orders impugned in both the writ applications are identical. The counsel appearing for the parties in both the cases are the same; facts are similar; the questions of law involved for decision in both these cases are the same; the counsel appearing for the parties advanced only one set of arguments which covers both the cases and they desire that both the cases may be disposed of by one judgment. Accordingly both the cases are hereby disposed of by this one judgment.2. The Patia stone quarry and the Kalarahang stone quarry were put to public auction on 6-3-78 as per notice (Annexure 3) issued by opposite party No. 3. The petitioner in O.J.C. No. 725/78 was the highest bidder in respect of the Patia stone quarry, and the petitioner in O.J.C. No. 738/78 was the highest bidder in respect of the Kalarahang stone quarry. The petitioners in both the cases deposited 50% of the lease amounts as required under the n...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »