Orissa Court August 1981 Judgments
Mst. Sarabai Agarwalla and ors. Vs. Haradhan Mohapatra and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-31-1981
Reported in: AIR1982Ori9; 52(1981)CLT535
ORDERR.N. Misra, C.J.1. This is an application of some of the heirs of the decree-holder auction-purchaser challenging the reversing appellate decision of the learned Additional District Judge of Sambalpur holding that their application for being put into possession was barred by limitation.2. One Mathura Prasad Agarwalla, husband of the petitioner No. 1 and father of the remaining petitioners as also of opposite party No. 2 filed a money suit against opposite party No. 1. The said suit was decreed on compromise. Execution Case No. 98 of 1968 was levied by the decree-holder for realisation of the decretal dues as opposite party No. 1 failed to satisfy the decree in terms of the compromise. In the execution case attachment and sale of certain lands were prayed for and ultimately the attached lands were sold for satisfaction of the decree and the decree-holder purchased the lands at the auction. Sale was confirmed on 24-7-1971 and the sale certificate was signed and issued to the auction...
Tag this Judgment!Executive Engineer, Rural Engineering Division, Puri Vs. Construction ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-28-1981
Reported in: AIR1982Ori18; 52(1981)CLT458
ORDERR.N. Misra, C.J.1. This is an appeal under the Arbitration Act (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') against the decision of the learned Subordinate Judge, Bhubaneswar, to make the award a rule of the Court.2. The award was received by the Court on 21st Mar., 1980. Notice was directed oa 27th Mar., 1980. From the endorsement in the Remarks Column against order No. 2, it appears that the Government Pleader was given notice in the matter that day. On 21st April, 1980, an application was made by the State for time to file objection and time was extended till 6th May, 1980. On 3rd May, 1980, the objection had been filed. The Subordinate Judge proceeded on the footing that for filing of an objection under Section 30 of the Act the period of limitation was 30 days and since the objection filed on 3rd May, 1980 was beyond the 30 day period from the date when notice was given, the said objection was not maintainable.3. The learned Additional Government Advocate in appeal contended that u...
Tag this Judgment!Orient Paper and Industries Ltd. and anr. Vs. Sales Tax Officer and or ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-27-1981
Reported in: [1982]50STC211(Orissa)
R.N. Misra, C.J.1. This application under Article 226 of the Constitution has been filed for quashing the order dated 18th August, 1980, under annexure-1, passed by the Sales Tax Officer (opposite party No. 1), and for a direction that the application for refund be granted.2. The assessee, a company incorporated under the Companies Act, has a factory for manufacture of paper and board of various varieties at Brajarajnagar in the district of Sambalpur within the territorial jurisdiction of this Court. The company is a registered dealer both under the Orissa Sales Tax Act and the Central Sales Tax Act and has been assigned registration numbers S. A. Ill 81, and S. A. III C. 6 respectively. The petitioners paid the tax due under both the statutes as required by law and had filed appropriate returns for the years 1973-74, 1974-75 and 1975-76. It is alleged that the Sales Tax Officer completed the assessments with undue haste without providing appropriate opportunity to the assessee to prod...
Tag this Judgment!Banchanidhi Panda Vs. Baishnab Charan Rout
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-26-1981
Reported in: AIR1982Ori8; 53(1982)CLT32
ORDERR.N. Misra, C.J.1. The plaintiff is in revision challenging an affirming appellate judgment against him in a suit for recovery of money on the basis of an alleged promissory note dated 29-9-1969.2. The defence was that the document which has now been produced and marked as Ext. 1 had been given as a blank paper with the defendant's signature on the revenue stamp evidencing a loan of Rs. 200/- from a different person and at the instance of the lender of Rs. 200/-, the left hand thumb impression and signature had also been affixed on the back side of that blank paper. The plaintiff obtained the document from the lender, converted it into a regular promissory note and though no loan had actually been taken, the suit was filed on the basis of the converted document.3. Both the Courts have found as a fact that a blank paper has been converted into the alleged promissory note. They have been impressed by the feature that while witnesses state that the entire document and the signature h...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Bina Debi Vs. Tapati Sengupta and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-26-1981
Reported in: AIR1981Ori222; 52(1981)CLT493
R.N. Misra, C.J. 1. Both these appeals are by the defendant No. 1 in two separate proceedings for revocation of probate of a Will dated 20th of June, 1964, and which have been disposed of by a common order by the learned District Judge of Cuttack on 21st of June, 1975. The relationship of the parties is available from the genealogy below : SURAMA | ____________________________________ | | Bani Bina (Daughter) (Daughter) (Pre-deceased Surama) -Married to C. P. Sengupta. | ______________________________________________________________________________________ | | | | | | Murtyunjoy Sanjay Bharat Tapati Shyamali Suvra (Son) (Son) (Son) (Daughter) (Daughter) (Daughter)Bani one of the daughters of Surama, was dead during the lifetime of Surama. On 20th of June, 1964, Surama executed a registered Will in favour of Bina. Nine days thereafter on the 29th Surama died of paralysis. Bina applied for probate of the Will on 3rd of September, 1966 to the District Judge of Cuttack impleading therein, ...
Tag this Judgment!Durga Shankar Kar Vs. State of Orissa and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-21-1981
Reported in: AIR1982Ori20; 52(1981)CLT402
P.K. Mohanti, J.1. The petitioner challenges the order dated 30-3-1981 (Annexure-1) passed by opposite party No. 2 under Section 32(1) of the Orissa Co-operative Societies Act, 1962 (hereinafter called 'the Act') superseding the Committee of Management of Kalahandi Wholesale Consumers Stores (hereinafter referred to as 'the Society' and appointing the Sub-Divisional Officer (Civil), Bhawanipatna as Administrator of the Society under Section 32(1) (b) of the Act.2. The Society is a 'Central Society' within the meaning of Section 2(h-2) of the Act. Petitioner is the President and opposite parties 2, 4, 5, 6 and 7 are the Directors of the Committee of Management of the Society. It is alleged that the opposite party No. 2 N. Madhav Rao, who is Assistant Registrar and not Dy. Registrar of Co-op Societies, Bhawanipatna, issued a notice under Section 32(1) of the Act on 23-1-1981 calling upon the members of the Committee to show cause as to why the Committee should not be superseded on the gr...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›