Orissa Court August 1984 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.
Duruju Mallik and Etc. Vs. Krupasindhu SwaIn and ors. Etc.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-31-1984
Reported in: AIR1985Ori202; 58(1984)CLT359
J.K. Mohanty, J.1. The question that arises for consideration in these revisions is whether a suit for permanent injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with the plaintiffs' possession over the disputed lands will abate under the provisions of Section 4(4) of the Orissa Consolidation of Holdings and Prevention of Fragmentation of Land Act, 1972 (Orissa Act 21 of 1972) (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'). One of these cases (C.R. No. 88/80) was placed before a learned single Judge of this Court Mr. Justice P. K. Mohanti (as he then was) and his Lordship was pleased to refer the case to a Division Bench as the reasoning given by a Division Bench of this Court in a case reported in AIR 1982 Orissa 48 : (1982) 54 Cut LT 143 (Rahas Bewa v. Kanduri Charan Sutar) was not accepted. Thereafter the case came up before a Division Bench consisting of Mr. Justice P. K. Mohanti (as he then was) and Hon'ble Mr. Justice D. P. Mohapatra and their Lordships thought it proper to refer t...
Tanguru Pradhan Vs. the State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-31-1984
Reported in: 1985(I)OLR117
K.P. Mohapatra, J.1. The appellant was convicted under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo imprisonment, for life by the learned Sessions Judge, Dhenkanal for having committed the murder of his step brother, Goura Pradhan on 9. 10, 1980.2. Prosecution case in brief is that the deceased was the son of the first wife and the appellant is the son of the second wife of Jadu Pradhan (P. W. 9). They were living separate in mess and property. On the date of occurrence at about 9 a. m. the deceased was fencing a guava tree standing in the back-yard of their homestead with thorn twigs The appellant protested saying that the deceased had no right to fence a part of the homestead which had fallen to his share. At this, there was exchange of hot words between the deceased and the appellant. All on a sudden the appellant assaulted the deceased by means of a Tangia on the neck and head. As the handle broke down, he picked up the Tangia of the deceased from the ground and re...
Sitaram Nai Vs. Puranmal Sonar and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-29-1984
Reported in: AIR1985Ori171
G.B. Patnaik, J.1. Plaintiff is the appellant against the judgment and decree of the Subordinate Judge, Sambalpur, in Title Suit No. 13 of 1966. The plaintiff filed the suit for a declaration of his right, title and interest over the Schedule-A property and for recovery of possession from defendant No. 1.2. According to the plaint case, Holding No. 104 in Ward No. 6 of Sambalpur Town was purchased under two sale deeds registered on 5-3-1929 in equal shares, one by Panaram (father of the plaintiff) and Chouthmal (brother of the plaintiff) and the other by Bhairuram and his son Baluram and they have been in possession of the same ever since the date of Their purchase. In 1929, the house standing onthe plot was reconstructed by submission of a joint plan. Baluram died in 1962 without any heir. One Mani De in execution of a decree in Execution Case No. 83 of 1962 attached the entire property for payment of his decretal dues against defendant No. 2 who is son of Raghunath, brother of the pl...
Radhashyam Jena Alias Mohapatra Vs. State
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-28-1984
Reported in: 58(1984)CLT388; 1984(II)OLR943
B.N. Misra, J.1. The petitioner has been convicted under Section 47(a) of the Bihar and Orissa Excise Act, 1915 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') and sentended to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven days and to pay a fire of Rs. 50/-, in default to rigorous imprisonment for ten days.2. According to the prosecution, the petitioner owns a grocery shop where he sells fire-wood, vegetables, cocoanut, etc. On 22. 8. 1979 at 6.30 p. m. P. W. Sub-Inspector of Excise, searched the petitioner's shop and found three bottles containing I/D liquor and nine paper packets each of which contained half a gram of non-duty-paid Ganja. P. W. 1 seized the aforesaid incriminating articles under seizure list Ext. 1. After completion of investigation, P. W. 1 submitted prosecution report against the petitioner.3. At the trial three witnesses were examined on behalf of the prosecution. As already noted, P. W. 1 had conducted the search. P. Ws. 2 and 3 are the seizure witnesses. No witness was examine...
Dinabandhu Tanti Vs. State
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-28-1984
Reported in: 1984(II)OLR1017
B.K. Behera, J.1. The appellant assails the order of conviction recorded by the Court of Session against him under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code sentencing him to undergo imprisonment for life after accepting the case of the prosecution that in the evening of October 18, 1979, the appellant committed the murder of Jema Bewa (here in after referred to as the 'deceased') by shooting her by means of an arrow (M.O.II) which pierced into her chest and resulted in her death. To bring home the charge, the prosecution had examined nine witnesses of whom Raghunath Tanti (P.W. 1), son of the deceased, was the first informant and the prosecution had relied on his evidence and that of his wife Gurubari Dei (P.W. 2) with regard to a dying declaration said to have been made by the deceased on the spot naming the appellant as her assailant, P.Ws.3 and 5, two co-villagers of P.W. 1 had testified about an extra judicial confession made by the appellant. In addition, the evidence of the Investiga...
Bhagaban Kirsani and Subaram Nag Alias Parja and Mathura Paikani Vs. S ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-27-1984
Reported in: 58(1984)CLT591; 1984(II)OLR1067
B.K. Behera, J1. The three appellants stand convicted under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (for short, the 'Code') for having committed the murder of Champa (hereinafter referred to as the 'deceased') on June 1, 1982, in a jungle and under Section 201 read with Section 34 of the Code for removing the dead body of the deceased and throwing it elsewhere. Each of the appellants has been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life for their conviction under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Code and to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three years for their conviction under Section 201 read with Section 34 of the Code.2. To bring home the charges, the prosecution had examined eleven witnesses including Sukra Paiko (P.W. 5) who was said to be a witness to the occurrence. The plea of the appellants was one of denial. The appellant Mathura had claimed her ownership in respect of the ornaments (M. Os. I to VI) which, as the prosecution sought to esta...
Ananda Chandra Mallik Vs. State of Orissa and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-24-1984
Reported in: 1984(II)OLR849
J.K. Mohanty, J.1. Petitioner was working as Senior Clerk in the office of the 'District Social Educational Organiser' being appointed in the year 1969 and was adjusted in the office of the District Inspector of Schools, Cuttack-I Circle on 16. 10.1969. For administrative convenience, the Educational Circles in the State were reorganised into a number of circles by order dated 15.12. 1970 by the Government of Orissa and each Circle was having its own cadre vide Annexure-2. After the said reorganisation the petitioner was placed under the Inspector of Schools, Cuttack-I Circle as a Senior Clerk. He was promoted to the post of Head Clerk-cum-Accountant by the order of the Inspector of Schools, Cuttack-I Circle and was posted in the office of the District Inspector of Schools, Athgarh under the same circle on 6. 9. 1971. While he was so working, all on a sudden he was transferred to the office of the District Inspector of Schools, Jaipur under the Inspector of Schools, Cuttack-II Circle w...
Jagabandhu Mahanta Vs. the State
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-24-1984
Reported in: 1985CriLJ575
B.K. Behera , J.1. According to Murrey Strawe, family is the most violent of all civilian institutions. It is really so? The case presented by the prosecution in this case may provide a pointer. A husband is alleged to have killed his wife and his own daughter is the principal witness for the prosecution besides the wife of his nephew who had been staying in his house and looking after his properties. The case presents a violent act on the part of the husband and also a violent attitude on the part of his close relations in involving him.2. The appellant is alleged to have done to death his second wife Sundari Dei (hereinafter referred to as the deceased) whom he had taken in marriage after he and his first wife failed to get a son. The reason for the murder, which occurred during the night of May 17/18, 1979 in village Madanpur in the district of Cuttack, by the appellant along with his two companions, unknown and unidentified, by inflicting blows on the chest of the deceased with a d...
Smt. Bishnupriya Rath Vs. President of Bhanjanagar College, Chatrapur ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-23-1984
Reported in: AIR1985Ori108
ORDERK.P. Mohapatra, J.1. In this revision the petitioner who is plaintiff in T. S. No. 74 of 1969 of the Court of Munsif, Bhanjanagar has challenged the order passed by the learned Subordinate Judge, Aska in Misc. Appeal No. 9 of 1978 confirming the order passed by the Munsif, Bhanjanagar rejecting the petition under Order 9, Rule 9 of the Civil P. C. (hereinafter referred to as the 'Code'). 2. The facts in brief may be stated. Title Suit No. 31 of 1970 instituted by the petitioner against the opposite parties was posted for hearing on 16-12-1976. On that day a petition for adjournment was filed on the ground that the petitioner as also her son, Debi Prasad, who was looking after the suit, were lying ill and were unable to appear in the suit for the purpose of hearing. The time petition was rejected and later the suit was dismissed for default. The petitioner filed a petition under Order 9, Rule 9 of the Code which was registered as M. J. C. No. 1 of 1977. In the said petition it was ...
Trinath Patnaik Vs. State of Orissa and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-23-1984
Reported in: 1984(II)OLR847
J.K. Mohanty, J.1. The petitioner in this writ petition, who was working as the Head Draftsman in the Settlement Office, Berhampur, has challenged the order of his superannuation from service on his completing the 58th year of age with effect from 30. 6. 1984 A. N. vide Annexure-2. His contention is that under the Second Proviso to Rule 71(a) of the Orissa Service Code, he should be retained in service upto the age of 60 years as he is a workman. 'Workman' has been defined in the note appended below the said proviso. It is as follows :'For this purpose, 'a workman' means a highly skilled, skilled or semi-skilled and unskilled artisan employed on a monthly rate of pay in any Government establishment.'2. In the counter it has been stated that the petitioner is not an artisan. The post of Head Draftsman is treated as a technical one for the purpose of administrative convenience only.3. It is seen from the counter that the Head Draftsman is a permanent staff who checks personally all bound...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »