Orissa Court April 1983 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.
Smt. Radha Nayakani Vs. Konchada Narayana Murty and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Apr-29-1983
Reported in: AIR1983Ori233; 56(1983)CLT1
J. K. Mohanty, J.1. Petitioner, an old lady, now aged about 75 years filed House Bent Control Case No. 91/76 against opposite party No. l--tenant for evicting him from the disputed house on the ground that she has no other house to live in and the disputed house is the only house which is required for her bona fide use and occupation. She only examined herself in support of her case and produced two documents (Exts. l and 2) before the House Rent Controller which a have been annexed as Annexirres 1 and 2 in this case. Opposite Party No. l--tenant opposed the application on the ground that the petitioner has got three houses besides the house in question out of which she has let out two houses and is residing in one. The opposite party No. 1 examined himself as O. P. W. No. 2 and another witness as O. P. W. 1, who is a clerk in the Berhampur Municipality and has produced the Demand Register of the Municipality to prove Exts. C, D and E to the effect that the petitioner has three more ho...
Dhruba Charan Lenka Vs. the State
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Apr-18-1983
Reported in: 1984CriLJ769
B. K. Behera, J.1. The appellant stood charged under Section 395 of the Penal Code with having committed dacoity along with seven others during the night of 23rd/24t.h June, 1977, it) the house of Jogi Sahu (PW 3) at village Jhanjalia during the commission of which cash of Rs. 15,000/- and gold and silver ornaments had allegedly been removed by the culprits causing injuries to PW 3 and three co-villagers, namely, Panchu Sahu, Pahali Sahu and Dharmu Mallik. On the basis of the first information report (Ext. 1) lodged by PW 3 before the Officer-in-charge of the Gop police station (PW 14), who had come to the hospital where pw 3 had been receiving treatment, on hearing a rumour that a dacoity had been committed, investigation proceeded and on its completion, charge-sheet was placed. The other culprits are said to be absconding. To bring home the charge to the appellant, the prosecution had examined fourteen witnesses. Of them, PW 3 was the victim and the sole witness to the occurrence. PW...
State of Orissa Vs. D.C. Routray
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Apr-13-1983
Reported in: AIR1983Ori163; 56(1983)CLT7
ORDERR.C. Pantnaik, J.1. These revisions arise out of orders passed by the learned Subordinate Judge of Bhubaneswar in Original Suit Nos. 220 and 221 of 1981 refusing the prayer of the petitioner to examine the arbitrator as a witness. 2. Disputes arose between the parties in connection with the execution of the work under agreements Number 33 P-2 of 1972-73 and Number 34 P-2 of 1972-73 and were referred to arbitration in Misc. Case Numbers 244 and 245 of 1977. The arbitrator submitted the awards in favour of the opposite party for a sum of Rs. 19,87,646/- in the former, and for Rs. 20,11,625/- in the latter. The petitioner filed petitions in both the cases questioning the validity of the awards on the ground that the arbitrator had no jurisdiction to entertain some of the claims as those were not arbitrable. It was also alleged that the arbitrator had misconducted the proceedings by his failure to state or incorporate in the awards his answers to the questions raised in the petitions ...
Gangaram Chhapolia Vs. Chief Engineer (Projects) and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Apr-13-1983
Reported in: AIR1983Ori262
ORDERB.K. Behera, J.1. By order dated 26-8-1976, passed by the learned Subordinate Judge, Cuttack, in Miscellaneous Case No. 240 of 1976, Mr. Baradakanta Misra, Advocate, was appointed as arbitrator with regard to the dispute between the parties in connection with reconstruction of weak and narrow culverts over National High Way No. 5 from miles 718/0 to 727/9 existing within the Khurda P. W. D. sub-division in the district of Puri, under F-2 agreement No. 3 of 1974-75. In the course of hearing before the arbitrator, the appellant in Misc. Appeal No. 159 of 1978 who is the petitioner in Civil Revision No. 517 of 1978 (hereinafter referred to as the claimant) was examined on Dec. 3, 4 and 5-12-1976. The matter was adjourned and notice of the adjourned date, it is said, was not given to the claimant. On 23-12-1976, the claimant moved the learned Subordinate Judge for revoking the authority of the arbitrator on various grounds. The application was dismissed as infructuous because prior to...
Adikanda Behera Vs. Daini Krishna Murthy Patra and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Apr-11-1983
Reported in: AIR1983Ori238
Patnaik, J.1. This is an appeal by defendant 1 against a joint decree passed against him and defendant 2 on a promissory note executed by them in favour of the plaintiff for a sum of Rupees 5,000.00.2. The plaintiff alleged that defendants were his friends and being in need of money for household expenses, they approached him for a friendly accommodation. The plaintiff advanced a sum of Rs. 5,000.00 on the basis of a promissory note dated 7-8-1967. The amount was received before the Sub-Registrar, Khallikotem and the document was registered. An endorsement to that effect was made by the Sub-Registrar. The defendants having failed to pay back in spite of repeated, demands, the suit was filed for the principal with interest. The plaintiff alleged that he was not a registered money-lender and the advance was by way of an accommodation. The defendants (the appellant and respondent 2) filed a joint, written statement. Their plea was one of denial of receipt of the consideration. They admitt...
Chintamani Sahoo (Deceased by Lr.) and ors. Vs. Commissioner of Orissa ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Apr-08-1983
Reported in: AIR1983Ori205; 56(1983)CLT47
P.K. Mohanti, Ag. C.J.1. The unsuccessful plaintiff is the appellant in both the Appeals which arise out of two confirming decrees passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Cuttack.2. Plot No. 145 comprising an area of 2.135 acres was the nijdakhali land of the deity Sri Laxminarayan Jew instiled at Mastaram Math in the city Cuttack. Defendant No. 3 who was the Mahant of the Math executed three permanent lease deeds dt. 8-1-44. 26-7-43 and 15-7-44 (Exts. 5, 6 and 7) in respect of 0.110 acre out of the said plot in favour of the plaintiff without the sanction of the Commissioner of Endowments. The plaintiff possessed the land from the respective dates of the leases and constructed house on the same. On 9-4-52, he sold away 0.025 acre out of the land to one Bidei Jethi and delivered possession to him. The Mahant was dismissed in the year 1965. In 1967, the Executive Officer of the Math appointed by the Commissioner of Endowments instituted a proceeding under Section 68 of the Oris...
Arakhita SwaIn Vs. Kandhuni Swain
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Apr-04-1983
Reported in: AIR1983Ori199; 56(1983)CLT223
B.N. Mishra, J.1. This appeal has been filed by the defendant against the confirming judgment of the learned Subordinate Judge, Aska. Plaintiff is the wife of Dandapani Swain and daughter of the late Choudhury Swain and Chitra Swain, who died in 1960 and 1962 respectively. Defendant is the son of the plaintiff and Dandapani. 2. The plaintiff's case may be briefly stated. She is the only daughter of her parents and after her marriage along with her husband she lived with her parents. By their joint efforts the late Choudhury and Dandapani acquired some landed properties. In 1953 there was misunderstanding between the late Choudhury and Dandapani and hence the properties were divided by a registered deed of partition between them on 26-4-1953. At this partition about Ac, 3.60 cents of land and a dwelling house fell to the share of the late Choudhury and his wife who possessed the said properties till their deaths in 1960 and 1962 respectively. Thereafter the plaintiff possessed the said ...
Ananda Chandra Sahu (Deceased by L.R.) and ors. Vs. Ananta Khuntia and ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Apr-04-1983
Reported in: AIR1983Ori250
P.K. Mohanti, Ag, C.J. 1. In this batch of writ applications, the petitioners have challenged the validity of the orders passed under Section 36-A of the Orissa Land Reforms Act by the Revenue Officer, Narsinghpur declaring opposite party No. 1 in each of the writ applications as raiyat in respect of the lands in question.2. It appears that during the pendency of the proceedings, opposite party No. 1 in each of the writ applications filed petitions on 5-6-1975 that he wanted to administer special oath to the petitioners before Mahakali Thakurani installed at village Kherada. It was stated that if the petitioners reiterated their claim on oath, he would give up the lands in favour of the petitioners. The petitioners agreed to the suggestion of opposite party No. 1 in each of the writ applications and accordingly on 22-6-1975 special oath was administered to the petitioners in the temple of Mahakali Thakurani in presence of the Revenue Officer. Relying cm the special oath and without tak...
State of Orissa Vs. Purusottam Pradhan
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Apr-04-1983
Reported in: AIR1983Ori287
B.K. Behera, J.1. In this appeal arising out of the order dated 24-3-1982, passed by Mr. H. Mohapalra, the learned Subordinate Judge at Rourkela, dismissing Misc. Case No. 26 of 1982, registered on an application made by the State of Orissa raising objection to the acceptability of the award under Section 33, Arbitration Act, 1940, in Title Suit No. 46 of 1981, passed by Mr. Niranjaa Misra, Superintending Engineer, P. H. Circle, Sambalpur, the grounds taken by the learned Additional Government Advocate at the time of addressing this Court are that there was no valid reference because there was no dispute between the parties and the arbitrator had no jurisdiction to award interest. It has been submitted on behalf of the respondent that the learned Subordinate Judge had carefully considered these objections and had rejected the application.2. The appointment of the arbitartor was Dot challenged then and this question was agitated only after the submission of the award. No misconduct on t...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›