Orissa Court March 1981 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.
Khedu Gountia and ors. Vs. State of Orissa and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-03-1981
Reported in: AIR1981Ori83; 51(1981)CLT362
ORDERR.N. Misra, C.J.1. The petitioners and opposite parties 2 to 19 were ex-intermediaries of two villages which constituted estates. The two villages vested in the State of Orissa under the Orissa Estates Abolition Act on 1-4-60. Compensation Case No. 293 of 1962 and Compensation Case No. 259 of 1962-63 were registered end compensation was assessed. The assessed compensation amounts were deposited in the treasury as revenue deposit in 1967. The petitioners and opposite parties 2 to 19 contended that there was no due publication of the assessment roll as required under Section 31 (1) of the Estates Abolition Act. Therefore, they were not bound by 1 he compensation determined by the Compensation Officer. An application was filed before the Compensation Officer for reopening the matter from the stage of publication of the draft assessment rolls. On 2-2-74 the Compensation Officer held that the draft assessment rolls were served on the intermediaries and as there was a bona fide mistake ...
Dr. Sarat Chandra Mohanty and ors. Vs. State
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-02-1981
Reported in: AIR1981Ori70; 51(1981)CLT371
R.N. Misra, C.J.1. Each of the petitioners was a registered Homoeopathic practitioner within the meaning of Section 29 of the Orissa Homoeopathic Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as the State Act) and was given appointment as doctor for a term in a dispensary as would appear from the order of appointment appended to the respective writ applications. The term of appointment was extended by subsequent orders from time to time, but each of them was later informed that service was being terminated from a specified date. The writ applications have been filed on the footing that the termination was under a misapprehension that the petitioners were not qualified to continue as doctors in dispensaries in view of the Homoeopathy Central Council Act, 1973 (Act 59 of 1973) (hereinafter referred to as the Central Act), and though similarly placed doctors continued in service and have even been absorbed as regular employees under the State Government, the petitioners have been discriminated again...
Lachman Gouda Vs. the State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-02-1981
Reported in: 52(1981)CLT32; 1982CriLJ929
N.K. Das, J.1. The appellant has been convicted Under Sections 302 and 201, Penal Code. He has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life for offence Under Section 302, IPC and R. I. for two years for offence Under Section 201, I. P. C, both the sentences are to run concurrently.2. Prosecution case is that the deceased was the wife of the appellant. In the night of 11-3-1977 there was a quarrel between the two and the appellant dealt a blow with a Tangia on the back of the head of the deceased which resulted in her death. On the following morning the appellant sent information to his father-in-law PW 3 that his wife died of colic pain. PW 3 along with his relations came to the village of the appellant. The dead body of the deceased was buried on 13-3-1977 by those persons. The appellant had a on and a daughter. His son was living with PW 3 whereas the daughter was living with .the appellant. PW 3 went back to the village along with the daughter (PW 7) aged about six years...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›