Orissa Court February 1983 Judgments
Brundaban Misra Vs. Iswar SwaIn and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Feb-21-1983
Reported in: AIR1983Ori172; 56(1983)CLT241
B.N. Misra, J.1. The plaintiff has filed this appeal against the reversing judgment of the learned Additional Subordinate Judge, Purl Respondents 1 to 9 and pro forma respondent No. 10 were defendants 1 to 10 respectively in the trial court. The lands described in Schedule 'Kha' appended to the plaint arc in dispute. The following genealogy describes the relationship between the plaintiff and defendant No. 10. The late Krutibas Mishra _________________|_______________ | | |The late The late The lateBalabhadra = Hadibandhu Narasingha _______________________| | | Sadasiba Brundaban (defendant No. 10) (plaintiff).2. According to the plaintiff, the lands described in Schedules 'Ka' and 'Ga' appended to the plaint belonged to the late Krulibas who died leaving behind him three sons, Balabhadra, Hadibandhu and Narasingha. Hadibandhu died issueless around 1926 while he was in a state of jointness with his brothers Balabhadra and Narasingha. After the death of Handibandhu, Balabhadra and Naras...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Dhobani Dei and ors. Vs. Smt. Suchitra Mohanti and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Feb-21-1983
Reported in: AIR1983Ori247
B.N. Misra, J.1. The defendants have filed this appeal against the confirming judgment of the learned Third Additional Subordinate Judge, Cuttack. The late Dayanldhi Mohanty, the late Chittaranjan Mohanty and Niharranjan Mohanty (respondent 5) filed Title Suit 15 of 1973, against the present appellants (defendants). Following the death of Dayanidhi Mohanty while the appeal was pending in this Court, present respondents l(a) and l(b) have been substituted in his place. Chittaranjan Mohanty had died while the matter was pending in the lower appellate court and present respondents 2, 3 and 4 were substituted in his place in that court. Present respondent 6 was pro forma defendant 4 in the trial court.2. The case of the plaintiffs may be briefly stated. Plaintiffs 2 and 3 and proforma defendant 4 are the sons of plaintiff 1. Deceased Bhanubati Dei was the wife of plaintiff 1. Defendants 1 and 3 are the wife and son respectively of defendant 2. The property described in schedule 'A' appende...
Tag this Judgment!State of Orissa Vs. Md. Adam Sharif
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Feb-16-1983
Reported in: 1983CriLJ1327
B.K. Behera, J.1 The State is in appeal against the reversing judgment and order of acquittal recorded by Mr. N. Sengupta, Additional Sessions Judge, Berhampur, holding the respondent, to be not guilty of the charge under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (for short. the 'Act') for violation of C1. 3 of the Orissa Declaration of Stocks and Prices of Essential Commodities Order. 1973 (for short, the 'Order') for which he stood convicted by the trial Court and sentence there under to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay a fine of Rupees 1,000 and in default of; payment thereof to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a further period of three months.2. The respondent along with the co-accused person, who was said to be the salesman in his shop, stood charged under S,. 7 of the Act for not displaying the stock of iron rods and G.C.I. sheets in the board as required by Clause 3 of the Order on July 3. 1974, which was detected by the Inspector of Vigi...
Tag this Judgment!Basanta Kumar SwaIn Vs. Smt. Sumati Swain
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Feb-15-1983
Reported in: 1983CriLJ1384
ORDERB.K. Behera, J.1.Upon hearing Mr. R. N. Panigrahi for the petitioner and Mr. S. Mantry for the opposite party. I find that the impugned order sentencing the petitioner to imprisonment for fifteen days or until the payment is made for non-payment of the amount of maintenance granted in favour of the opposite party in a proceeding under Section 125 of the Cr. P.C. had been passed by Mr. K. C. Patnaik, Judicial Magistrate. First Class. Baramba in violation of Section 125(3) with regard to the issue of a warrant of levy of the amount due in the manner provided for levying fines before sentencing a defaulting person to imprisonment and without taking due notice of an ad interim order of injunction passed by him in his capacity as the Additional Munsif restraining the opposite party from proceeding with the realisation of the maintenance amount in Miscellaneous Case No. 5 of 1982 arising out of Title Suit No. 9 of 1981 instituted by the petitioner as the plaintiff in which the opposite ...
Tag this Judgment!Ram Chandra Das Vs. Hiralal Modi and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Feb-14-1983
Reported in: AIR1984Ori21
R. C. Patnaik, J.1. The petitioner in this writ application has sought for quashing cf the decision of the House Rent Controller confirmed in appeal directing his eviction from the premises in question by issue of a writ of certionari.2. Opposite party No 1 filed an application under Section 7 of the Orissa House Rent Control Act (for short, 'the Act') in Oct. 1975 for eviction of the petitioner on the ground of wilful default in payment of rent since 1-9-1970. He alleged that the petitioner was inducted by him as a tenant on 21-8-1966 at a monthly rental of Rs. 125/-. Though the contractual period was three years the petitioner continued as a statutory tenant thereafter. In spite of repeated demands, the petitioner failed to pay and such default was wilful. It was further averred that a suit for realisation of arrears of rent had been decreed against the petitioner by the civil court. In reply, the petitioner challenged the locus standi of opposite party No. 1 as trustee of any trust ...
Tag this Judgment!Maheswar Gouda and ors. Vs. the State
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Feb-11-1983
Reported in: 1983CriLJ1029
P.K. Mohanti, J. 1. The appellants along with seventeen others stood charged with the offence under Section 148. I. 'P.C. for having formed themselves into an unlawful assembly with the common object of causing the death of one Rama Murty Choudhury. They stood further charged under Section 302 read with Section 149, I.P.C. for having caused the death of the said Rama Murty Choudhury in prosecution of their common object. Appellant 10 Ladu Das, Appellant 11 Gangadhar Gouda and Appellant, 12 Odaya Behera were alternatively charged under Section 302 read with Section 34, I.P.C. for having caused the (death of the said Rama Murty Choudhury in furtherance of their common intention. Appellant 6 Somanath alias Khadal Gouda, Appellant 11 Gangadhar Gouda and Appellant 19 Jaganjiath Behera stood further charged under Section 323, I.P.C. with having caused hurt to PW 4 Gajendra Choudhury. After trial, the learned Sessions Judge acquitted all the accused persons of the charge under Section 148, I....
Tag this Judgment!Allad Naik and anr. Vs. the State
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Feb-11-1983
Reported in: 1983CriLJ1032
B.K. Behera, J.1. The appellants challenge the judgment and order of conviction recorded on Jan. 20, 1979, by Mr. J. Tyadi, Sessions Judge, Mayurbhanj-Keonjhar, in Sessions Tria} No. 36-M of 1978, holding them guilty of the charge under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Penal Code and sentencing each of them thereunder to undergo imprisonment for life after accepting the case of the prosecution that owing to land dispute between the deceased Balaram Sahu (hereinafter to be referred to as the 'deceased') on the one hand and the appellants on the other, the 1;wo appellants, one of 'them, namely, Allad Naik, being armed with bow and arrows and the other, namely, Harihar Naik, being armed with a Tangia (axe) and a spade, challenged the deceased An May 19, 1977 as to why he had -got the disputed land recorded in his name and inspite of the fact that the deceased returned the certified copy of the sale deed to them and offered to return the land to them. and get the record changed by s...
Tag this Judgment!Kailash Chandra Sahu and ors. Vs. the State
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Feb-11-1983
Reported in: 1984CriLJ772
B.K. Behera, J.1. The appellants and seven other co-accused persons, namely, Gaya Dehury, Mayadhar Denary, Gangadhar Dehury, Narahari Dehury, Madan Dehury, Rama Dehury and Binu Dehury. stood trial in the court of Mr. N.P. Mohapatra, Additional Sessions Judge, Cuttack, in Sessions Trial Case No. 121-C of 1976. The appellant Kailash Chandra Sahu stood charged under Section 302 of the Penal Code (the 'Code', for short) with having committed the murder of Bhima Behera (hereinafter referred to as the 'deceased') at village Nalida on July 6, 1975 and the appellant Sulochana Dei described as Suli Dei in. the evidence stood charged under Section 302 read with Section 109 of the Code for abetting the commission of the said offence. The appellants and the co-accused persons stood charged under Section 148 of the Code for having formed an unlawful assembly being armed with deadly weapons, such as, Bhalas, Tentas and lathis, in prosecution of the common object to kill the deceased and his sons and...
Tag this Judgment!N.K. Misra Vs. J.N. Sen Sarma, Official Liquidator, Rajendra Paper Mil ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Feb-09-1983
Reported in: [1985]57CompCas637(Orissa)
P.K. Mohanti, J. 1. On December 24, 1959, there was an order for windingup of the company called M/s. Rajendra Paper Mills Ltd., having its registered office at Titilagarh in the district of Balangir under the provisionsof the Companies Act, 1956, and the official liquidator was directed tofunction as the liquidator.2. Under Section 545(3) of the Act, the directors of the company were to submit a statement of affairs of the company within twenty-one days from the date of the winding-up order or within such extended time not exceeding three months from the date as the official liquidator or the court may, for special reasons, appoint. The petitioner who is an ex-director of the company was called upon by the official liquidator to submit the statement of affairs, books and records of the company. In response to the notice, the petitioner has come up with this application for a declaration that he has no liability for submitting the statement of affairs, books and records of the company....
Tag this Judgment!State of Orissa Vs. Shyam Sundar Panigrahi
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Feb-07-1983
Reported in: AIR1983Ori191
ORDERB.K. Behera, J. 1. The State of Orissa assails the order dated Jan. 8 1982 passed by the learned Subordinate Judge. Berhampur, on an application made under Section 8 of the Indian Arbitration Act (for short, the Act).2. The opposite party had entered into an agreement with the Executive Engineer, Ganjam (R & B) Division for construction of the building meant for the Vigilance Office under Agreement No. F-2-256/1976-77 at an estimated cost of Rs. 2.25.524.00 and the stipulated date for completion of the work was one year from the date of receipt of the work order, i. e., from Nov. 5. 1976. The work was completed after the stipulated date in Mar. 1978. The case of the opposite party was that he had received Rs. 2,27,007/- and he was entitled to get a balance amount of Rs. 1,54,000/-from the State and also an amount of Rs. 1,00,000/- being his claim for miscellaneous items of work done by him for which he had not been paid. These claims of the opposite party were not accepted and the...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »