Orissa Court May 1979 Judgments
Radhamohan Dev and anr. Vs. Nabakishore Naik and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: May-18-1979
Reported in: AIR1979Ori181; 48(1979)CLT178
J.K. Mohanty, J.1. Plaintiffs, whose suit has been decreed in part by the Subordinate Judge, Puri in O. S. No. 4/61 of 1969/66 (I), have preferred this appeal against that part of the decree which has gone against them.2. Plaintiff No. 2 Parbati Dei claiming herself as a marfatdar of the family deity Sri Radhamohan Dev (Plaintiff No. 1) filed the suit for giving her 4 annas share in the sebayati right of plaintiff No. 1; for partition of the sebayati interest of herself and of defendants Nos. 1 to 6 or, in the alternative, for joint possession of all the deity's properties described in Schedules 'A' and 'B' of the plaint; for framing of a scheme for the proper management of the affairs of plaintiff No. 1 by allowing each of the sebayats to have his term in proportion to his right over the endowed properties; for setting aside the alienations of the devottar properties effected by defendants Nos. 2 and 3 in favour of defendants Nos. 7 ' to 9 which are described in schedule 'C' of the pl...
Tag this Judgment!Abdul Rasid Khan Vs. Sk. Rahimtulla and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: May-14-1979
Reported in: AIR1979Ori175; 47(1979)CLT643
ORDERN.K. Das, J.1. Both the revisions have been filed against the same order. In C. R. 509/78 the prayer is in a concise form and this has been clearly stated in C. R. 510/78. Both the revisions are the same, the latter being in a clarified form only. So, both the revisions are considered to be one.2. The petitioner filed an application under Section 151 of the Civil P. C. in an execution case. The said petition has been rejected and as against that order the revision has been preferred. The decree-holders in O. S. No. 48/71-I, which was instituted on 11-5-1971 and finally disposed of on 22-6-1976, are executing the decree. The decree directs opposite party No. 6 to deliver vacant possession of the suit premises, failing which he is to be evicted through the process of Court. In that execution case, the present petitioner filed petitions under Section 151, Civil P. C. which have been rejected.3. In O. S. No. 48/71-1, the petitioner filed a petition to be added as a party, but the said...
Tag this Judgment!S.S. Sahu Vs. Hariprasad Saha and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: May-14-1979
Reported in: AIR1979Ori186; 47(1979)CLT658
N.K. Das, J.1. The defendant in a suit for dissolution of partnership is in appeal against rejection of a petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act praying to stay the suit.2. The plaintiffs and defendant constituted the partnership in the name and style of 'Shri Shibsankar Saha & Brothers.' The plaintiffs filed the suit for dissolution of the partnership and for rendition of accounts. There are charges of misappropriation of the partnership money and violation of the conditions of the partnership and mismanagement against the defendant who is the Managing Partner. A petition was filed for appointment of receiver on the allegation of mismanagement. The defendant took a couple of adjournments to file written statement and objection to the petition for appointment of receiver. Ultimately he filed a petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act. The main grounds (sic) on which the partnership deed provided for settlement of disputes by arbitration and hence the suit should be st...
Tag this Judgment!Collector of Puri Vs. Kamala Kanta Das
Court: Orissa
Decided on: May-01-1979
Reported in: AIR1979Ori147; 47(1979)CLT613
R.N. Misra, J. 1. The Collector of Puri has carried this appeal against the award of the learned District Judge of Puri passed under Orissa Act 18 of 1948.2. Under three separate notifications issued under Orissa Act 18 of 1948 in the manner indicated below, 50 acres of lands of the respondent were acquired for the purposes of Capital construction at Bhubaneswar:--(i) 8-8-1950 -- 13.752 acres.(ii) 15-11-1952 -- 20.200 acres.(iii) 31-3-1953 -- 16.048 acres. The claimant asked for a total compensation of Rs. 4,69,900 in the following way:--(i)Market value of 50 acres of lands at Rs. 7,000/- per acre.Rs. 3,50,000/-(ii)Solatium at 15% of the market value.Rs. 52,500/-(iii)Damage on account of loss of trees.Rs. 2,000/-(iv)Damage to other property on account of ac quisition.Rs. 55,400/-(v)Damage for change of business.Rs. 10,000/-The competent authority offered compensation at the rate of Rs. 75 per acre and the Arbitrator by his award dated 30th of June, 1962, determined the market value at ...
Tag this Judgment!Debaraj Pradhan and ors. Vs. Ghanshyam and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: May-01-1979
Reported in: AIR1979Ori162
R.N. Misra, J. 1. Defendants 1 and 3 to 5 have carried this appeal against the judgment and decree of the learned Subordinate Judge of Nayagarh in a suit for partition. The relationship of the parties is available from the genealogy given below : BANSIDHAR MANSINGH | ------------------------------ | | Raghunath Ghanasyam alias | Udayanath (Plaintiff) ------------------------------------------------------ | | | | | Debraj Guna- Mohan Purna- Padmanabh (D-1) nidhi (D-3) nanda (D-5) (D-2) (D-5)Defendant No. 2 has been adopted out of the family. 'Ka' Schedule property with an extent of 4,36 acres admittedly constitutes the ancestral assets. Kha to Chha schedule properties were acquired jointly in the names of plaintiff and defendants 1, 3, 4 and 5 between 17-9-1955 and 10-12 1965 and the particulars of these acquisitions appear from a chronological statement below:--Sl. No.DateExhibitParticulars.1.17-9-1955445 decimals of land acquired for Rs. 100/ in the name of all the five from D. W. 1.2...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›