Orissa Court April 1980 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.
Purna Chandra Giri Vs. Orissa Khadi and Village Industries Board
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Apr-29-1980
Reported in: 50(1980)CLT91
R.N. Misra, J.1. Petitioner was employed as a Ghani Mistry under the Orissa Khadi and Village Industries Board and his date of birth is 2-7-1927. On 2-4-1977, notice was given of compulsory retirement in terms of the service regulation on the expiry of three months' period. Though several contentions were raised in the writ petition, at the hearing Mr. Nanda for the petitioner challenged the order of compulsory retirement on the ground that such retirement amounted to retrenchment and in the absence of compliance of the statutory requirement of Section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act, the order of retrenchment became invalid and petitioner's service could not have been terminated. He should, therefore, be deemed to have continued in employment.2. There is no dispute before us that the Khadi Board is an industry and to its employees the Industrial Disputes Act. would be applicable. Counsel for the Board, however, has taken the stand that compulsory retirement in terms of the Board's ...
Padmalochan Sahu Vs. Lokanath Sethi and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Apr-29-1980
Reported in: 49(1980)CLT605; 1981CriLJ189
ORDERS. Acharya, J.1. The petitioner is the complainant in I. C.C. Case No. 173/79 pending in the Court of the Sub-divisional Judicial Magistrate, Bhubaneswar. The complaint in the case was filed by the petitioner on 24-10-1979. On that date after examining the complainant, the Magistrate stayed the proceeding under Section 210 Cr. P.C. till the completion of the investigation. The complainant appeared in court on 9 subsequent dates but the court on each date merely fixed another date for putting up the case records on its observation that the investigation was not complete or that the report in the Final Form in the police case, which was under investigation, had not been received by it. The complainant on later dates filed petitions to direct an enquiry under Section 202 Cr. P.C. on the complaint filed by him, but the court did not proceed with the complaint case on the ground that investigation of the aforesaid police case was proceeding and report in the Final Form had not been rec...
Union of India (Uoi) and anr. Vs. Madan Mohan and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Apr-22-1980
Reported in: AIR1981Ori9; 50(1980)CLT29
P.K. Mohanti, J.1. This appeal, by defendants 1 and 2, arises out of a suit for recovery of Rs. 7,743.53 paise on account of damages for deterioration of a consignment of 277 baskets and 20 bags of potato seeds.2. The consignment was booked fromPatna City under Parcel Way Bill No. 293397 dated 21-11-62 (Ext. A). It was alleged that in order to get the consignmentwithin three days, the consignor paid a higher rate of freight for transit of the goods by parcel van. The delivery was to be given at Cuttack Station by 24-11-62. But the van carrying the consignment arrived at Cuttack Railway Station on 15-12-62. The plaintiff took open and assessment delivery of the consignment through his representative Laxminarayan Singh (P. W. 4) on the same date. The Station Master granted a Damage Certificate (Ext. 6) assessing the damages at 40% to 55% of the goods. The total quantity of potato seeds which were completely damaged came to 143 1/2 baskets. The plaintiff took delivery of 163 1/2 baskets o...
Bhubaneswar Mishra and anr. Vs. Smt. Ujalamani Devi and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Apr-16-1980
Reported in: AIR1980Ori181; 50(1980)CLT100
R.N. Misra, J.1. Plaintiffs are in appeal against the reversing judgment and decree of the learned District Judge of Puri in a suit for a declaration that the compromise decree in T.M.S. No. 25 of 1968 was illegal, void, inoperative and did not bind them. They had also asked for confirmation of possession.2. Plaintiffs who are the minor sons of one Satyabadi Mishra alleged that they lost their parents when they were quite young. Satyabadi, Chandrasekhar and Basudeb were brothers but Satyabadi had been adopted to Balabhadra and he had succeeded to the properties left by Balabhadra as his heir. The disputed property appertaining to holding No. 180 wasSatyabadi's ancestral property and he was in possession of the same. After his death, plaintiffs have come into possession. Plaintiffs' father lacked average intelligence and was very credulous. Taking advantage of his simplicity and lack of intelligence sale deeds in respect of various items of property had been taken from him without payme...
The Titaghur Paper Mills Co. Limited Vs. State of Orissa and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Apr-09-1980
Reported in: 50(1980)CLT13
K.B. Panda, J.1. O. J. C. Nos. 198, 202 and 203 of 1977 are in respect of Orissa sales tax assessments for the financial years 1973-74, 1974-75 and 1975-76, whereas O. J. C. Nos. 195, 196 and 197 of 1977 are in respect of Central sales tax assessments for the same period, which the assessee-petitioner seeks to quash. O. J. C. Nos. 204, 205, 206, 199, 200 and 201 of 1977 are for stay of realisation of the tax demand for the above period under both the Acts.2. The petitioner is a joint stock public limited company governed by the Companies Act (Act 1 of 1956), having its registered office at Calcutta. It has a paper mill at Choudwar, in Orissa, where it manufactures paper and allied products. Opposite party No. 1 is the State of Orissa, and opposite parties Nos. 2, 3, 4, and 5 are-the officers of Orissa sales tax department. The petitioner is a registered dealer under the Orissa Sales Tax Act and adopts mercantile method of accounting commencing from 1st April and ending on 31st March, a...
Mukunda Baral, Etc. Vs. Godavaris Misra and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Apr-07-1980
Reported in: 50(1980)CLT83; 1980CriLJ1215
ORDERR.N. Misra, J.1. Two complaint petitions were filed on 22-8-1978 in the court of the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate at Puri being I.C.C. 327 of 1978 and I.C.C. 328 of 1978. In the first case the complainant was Mukunda Baral, who described himself as a subtenant of a premises known as 'Roma Villa' located within the Town of puri while the second case was by one Harihar Singha said to be a tenant of the premises. In the first case, the accused persons were three in number namely, the Deputy Superintendent of Police, the Officer-in-charge of the Town Police Station of Puri and an Assistant Sub-Inspector of that Police Station. In the other case, the accused persons were five, i.e. besides the three above-named persons who are common, another Sub-Inspector and one Manjulata Mohanty were also added as accused persons. The prosecution allegations in brief were the following: The owner of Roma Villa is a person of Calcutta. Harihar Singh had been occupying the premises for a...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›