Orissa Court March 1982 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.
P. Venkateswar Rao Vs. Revenue Officer and Tahsildar and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-05-1982
Reported in: AIR1983Ori9
Patnaik, J.1. This application for awrit of certiorari arises out of a ceiling proceeding under Chapter IV of the Orissa LandReforms Act. The petitioner and hisbrothers were treated to belong to one familyand certain of their lands were classified asClass I and the ceiling proceeding was concluded accordingly. Appeal and revisionhaving yielded no benefit, the petitioner hastaken shelter in this Court.2. So far as the question of separation/ partition is concerned, we have not been convinced about the merits of the petitioner's case. The said finding of the Revenue Authorities is not available to be impeached and is, therefore, sustained. There is, however, much force in the submission of the counsel for the petitioner that the adjudication of the question of classification has been perfunctory.3. Local inspection was made by the Revenue Officer and it was found that the petitioner has set up his own water pump run by diesel and water channels were found to have been constructed. From t...
Gelhi Vs. Nanda Kishore Parida and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-05-1982
Reported in: AIR1983Ori52
Patnaik, J.1. This is an appeal by defendant No. 3 under the Letters Patent against a decision of one of the learned Judges of this Court granting review of the judgment delivered in First Appeal No. 264 of 1969. 2. Facts giving rise to this appeal in brief: Title Suit No. 3 of 1967 was instituted for partition of the properties described in Schedules B, C, D, and E of the plaint. Certain properties described in Schedule F had been alienated by defendant No. 3. A declaration had been sought that the said transfers in favour of defendant No. 1 by defendant No. 3 were invalid. There was an issue regarding adoption of plaintiff No. 4. The trial court disbelieved the story of adoption.A preliminary decree decreeing the shares of plaintiffs Nos. 1 to 4 as 1/4, of defendant No. 2 as 1/4, of defendant No. 3 as 1/4 and of defendants 4 to 7 as 1/4 was passed. It was directed that the property alienated would be adjusted from the share of defendant No. 3. Plaintiffs filed first appeal No. 264 of...
Miti Bewa Vs. Daitari Nayak and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-05-1982
Reported in: AIR1982Ori174
R.C. Patnaik, J.1. This is a plaintiff's second appeal against the confirming decisions of the courts below, arising out of a suit for declaration of title on declaration that defendant No. 1 had no title to the property and for confirmation of possession and injunction and for setting aside the sale deeds executed by defendant No. 1 in favour of defendant No. 2 and the sale deed in favour of defendant No. 6.2. The plaintiff alleged that she was the heir of the property left by her husband, her son having had a premature death. Defendant No. 1 has married her eldest daughter. After the death of her son, defendant No. 1, her son-in-law came to live in her house and looked after her. Some time later, he asked her to execute a power-of-attorney for facility of management of her property. In good faith, she executed a document in favour of defendant No. 1. She continued to enjoy and possess the property left by her husband till in 1975 her possession was disturbed and on enquiry she learne...
Tarini Sahu and Another Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-05-1982
Reported in: 1982CriLJ1234
ORDERB.K. Behera, J.1. The petitioner Tarini Sahu personally and on behalf of the firm Krishna Chandra Sahu and Sons stands convicted Under Section 16(1)(ii) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') and sentenced thereunder to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three months and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/-and in default of payment thereof, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a further period of one month for manufacturing 'Bura' (Nabata) without a food licence required to be obtainted under Rule 50 of the Rules framed under the Act which was detected by the Food Inspector (P.W. 1) of the Berhampur Municipality in the presence of P.W. 2, an employee of the said Municipality, on 27-4-1978 at Berhampur. The article was sent for examination by the Public Analyst and it conformed to the standards prescribed under the Rules and thus the article of food was not adulterated within the meaning of the Act. The petitioner was prosecuted only for ...
Banshidhar Mohanty Vs. Gourgopal Das and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-03-1982
Reported in: AIR1982Ori140; 53(1982)CLT564
Behera, J.1. The decree-holder in Execution Case No. 97 of 1968 of the court of the First Additional Subordinate Judge, Cuttack, who figured as the respondent No. 1 in Miscellaneous Appeal No. 214 of 1974 of this Court decided by the learned single Judge Honourable R. N. Misra, J. (as his Lordship then was), is an appeal against the reversing judgment of the learned Judge allowing the appeal preferred by the respondent No. 1 herein against the order dated Aug. 26, 1974, passed by the First Additional Subordinate Judge, Cuttack, in the aforesaid Execution Case directing sale of lots A and C properties for satisfaction of the decree under execution.2. The appellant obtained a mortgage decree for Rs. 41,211.31 paise which, by the time of execution, amounted to over Rs. 49,000- The security for the mortgage was a house located in the city of Cuttack. Steps were taken under Section 14 of the Orissa Money Lenders Act (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') to estimate the value of the propert...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›