Orissa Court February 1985 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.
Umakanta Pal and ors. Vs. Banchhanidhi SwaIn and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Feb-26-1985
Reported in: 1985(I)OLR598
G.B. Pattnaik, J.1. Defendants are the appellants against a reversing judgment passed by the Subordinate Judge, Nayagarh, holding that the order of dismissal passed by defendant No. 1 against the plaintiff is null and void.2. Plaintiff filed the suit for a declaration that the order of dismissal dismissing him from service passed by defendant No. 1 was null and void, since defendant No. 1 had ceased to be the administrator of the Regional Cooperative Marketing Society Limited, Nayagarh, with effect from 11.7.1973, on the following averments. The plaintiff was appointed as Secretary of the Regional Cooperative Marketing Society (for short, 'R. C. M. S.'). In a proceeding under Section 32 of the Orissa Co-operative Societies Act (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') against the committee of Management of the R. C. M. S. The Deputy Registrar, Co-operative Society, passed an order on 10.7.1972 superseding the committee of Management and appointed the Assistant Registrar of Co-operative So...
Jadumani Padhan Vs. Kumudini Padhani
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Feb-22-1985
Reported in: AIR1986Ori10
G.B. Patnaik, J. 1. This revision is directed against the order of the Subordinate Judge, Bargarh, dt. 23-11-1981 wherein the petitioner has been directed to pay interim maintenance at the rate of Rs. 300/- per month to the wife opposite party.2. The wife filed Title Suit No. 80 of 1979 for separate residence and maintenance and during the pendency of the suit filed an application for interim maintenance. The husband, the present petitioner, filed objection to the said petition challenging the maintainability of the same and further challenging the quantum claimed by the wife. The Subordinate Judge after examining the materials on record has directed by the impugned order that the petitioner-husband would pay Rs. 300/- per month.3. Mr. P. K. Misra, the learned counsel for the petitioner, contends that a Hindu wife is entitled to live separately from her husband and get maintenance only when the conditions prescribed in Sub-section (2) of Section 18 of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenanc...
Babaji Charan Das Vs. District Judge and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Feb-22-1985
Reported in: 1985(I)OLR621
P.C. Misra, J.1. This is an application under Act, 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the orders of the learned District Judge, Sundargarh as well as the Estate Officer passed under the Orissa Public Premises ( Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act')2. The petitioner was originally appointed as a Peon under the Public Works Department (Roads and Buildings) at Rourkela. There after his services were placed at the disposal of the General Public Health Department and since then he is serving as a Peon in the said Department. When the petitioner was working under the Public Works Department (R & B) at Rourkela, he approached the Executive Engineer (R & B) for accommodation in one of the Government quarters. The then Executive Engineer upon consideration of the representation of the petitioner allowed him to occupy quarters No. G/58 meant for occupation of Class IV employees of the Government. The petitioner's case is that he has been o...
Nimai Murmu Vs. the State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Feb-21-1985
Reported in: 1985(I)OLR281
B.K. Behera, J.1. This appeal has been directed against the judgment and order passed by Mr. P. Jena, Sessions Judge, finding the appellant to be guilty of the charge of murder, convicting him under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing him there under to undergo imprisonment for life. The appellant stood charged for committing the murder of his wife Gurubari (hereafter to be referred to as 'the deceased'). The prosecution had examined six witnesses to establish its case. 2. The tale presented by the prosecution at the trial was one of the husband killing his wife suspecting her fidelity and for her secret love affairs with his younger brother of which there was no material ether then the extrajudicial confession in the evidence of P. Ws. 3 and 4 which not only bristled with material discrepancies with regard to the exact words said to have been uttered by the appellant, but was also fraught with suspicious features to be discussed hereinafter. The prosecution had not bee...
Govinda Chandra Rout Vs. Managing Committee of Chitrotpala High School ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Feb-21-1985
Reported in: 1985(I)OLR379
R.C. Patnaik, J.1. This is an application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the quashing of Annexure- 8, an order of penalty imposed in a disciplinary proceeding, and for a mandamus directing the opposite parties to treat the petitioner as continuing in service and to pay the arrear salary for the months of January, February and March, 1979 and subsistence allowance from 31. 3. 1979 to17.6.1979 and salary from 15.6.1979 to 29.2.1980.2. The petitioner was appointed as a peon in the Chitrotpala High School in the district of Cuttack, an aided recognised institution. He alleged that a part of his salary was not being paid every month though he was made to sign the acquittance roll for the full amount and he reported this fact to the Inspector of Schools as per Annexure-2. On 26. 3. 1979, he was directed by the Headmaster to meet the Secretary to settle the controversy. Nothing came out. By Annexurer-5 dated 31. 3. 1979 he was suspended and was served with the charge sheet...
Upendra Mahakud Vs. the State
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Feb-21-1985
Reported in: 1985CriLJ1767
B.K. Behera, J.1. The appellant assails the order of conviction recorded against him by the Court of Session under Section 302 of the Penal Code (for short, the 'Code') sentencing him to undergo imprisonment for life after accepting the case of the prosecution that after the night fall on Feb. 14, 1980, the appellant killed his sister's husband Mitra Gope alias Mahakud (to be described hereinafter as the 'deceased') after a quarrel on the basis of the evidence of Kanaka Dei (P.W. 6), the daughter of the deceased, who had been examined as a witness to the occurrence, the evidence of three co-villagers (P.Ws. 3, 7 and 8) staying in the same Labour Colony with the appellant and the deceased about the extra-judicial confession of the appellant and the finding of human blood in the shirt (M. O. 1.) and the half pant (M. O. II) which had been worn by the appellant and in the knife (M. O. Ill) which he had been holding and had been used as the weapon of attack and the nail clippings of the ap...
Pahali Raut Vs. Khulana Bewa and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Feb-20-1985
Reported in: AIR1985Ori165; 60(1985)CLT33; 1985(I)OLR370
R.C. Patnaik, J.1. The short question that falls for consideration in this revision under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure at the instance of defendant No. 6 is if the trial Court had jurisdiction to extend time to enable defendant No. 6 whose application for amendment of the written statement had been allowed earlier to carry out the amendment long after the expiry of the period of fourteen days prescribed under Order 6, Rule 18 of the Code.2. By order dated 18-12-79 defendant No. 6's prayer for amendment of written Statement was granted subject to payment of cost. Cost was paid the next day. No time having been fixed for carrying out theamendment by the order, the same was to be carried out within fourteen days from the date of the order. Defendant No. 6, however, did not amend his written statement. The matter rested like that until it was discovered much later i.e, at the state of argument that the amendment had not been incorporated in the written statement of defendant ...
Muralidhar Das Vs. Bansidhar Das and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Feb-20-1985
Reported in: AIR1986Ori119
ORDERR.C. Patnaik, J.1. The petitioner became an heir specified in Class 1 of the Schedule to the Hindu Succession Act along with opposite parties 1 to 4 in respect of certain property by virtue of intestate succession under the Act. Opposite parties 1 to 4 having transferred their interest in the property which devolved upon all of them by intestate succession, the petitioner filed an application under Section 22 of the Hindu Succession Act (for short, 'the Act') and miscellaneous case No. 250 of 1977 was registered. The Court determined the consideration at Rs. 250A. On 16-2-79 the Court directed opposite parties 5 to 10 to retransfer the property to the petitioner. It further directed that on failure of the opposite parties 5 to 10 to execute the sale deed, the same would be executed by the Court. The petitioner instituted a proceeding for execution of the sale deed and recovery of possession. The sale deed was executed by the Court on the default of opposite parties 5 to 10. Then t...
Basanta Kumari Debi Vs. Sarada Prasad Das and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Feb-20-1985
Reported in: AIR1985Ori242; 1985(I)OLR318
ORDERR.C. Patnaik, J.1. This revision is directed against the order passed by the learned Subordinate Judge, Kendrapara rejecting the petitioner's application under Section 18A of the Court-fees Act seeking exemption from payment of Court-fee.2. The petitioner filed a plaint in the Court of the Subordinate Judge seeking the following reliefs :(a) For a declaration that defendant 1 was not the adopted son of late Chaturbhuja;(b) for a declaration that the deed of gift purported to have been executed by Chaturbhuja in favour of defendant 1 and the sale deeds executed by defendants 1 and 2 in favour of defendants 4 to 9 were not valid and binding on the plaintiff; and(c) for permanent injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with the half interest of the plaintiff in the joint family property etc.3. She alleged therein that her income did not exceed Rs. 3,000/- per annum and filed an application under Section 18A of the Court-fees Act seeking exemption from paying court-fee....
Central Road Transport Corporation Ltd. Vs. Orissa State Commercial Tr ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Feb-20-1985
Reported in: AIR1985Ori256; [1987]61CompCas465(Orissa); 1985(I)OLR338
G.B. Patnaik, J.1. Plaintiff is the appellant against the judgment and decree of the Subordinate Judge, Jajpur, in money Suit No. 30 of 19V3.2. Plaintiff is the owner of a truck bearing registration number ORU 1197. The plaintiff avers that while the said truck was proceeding towards Paradeep, it had a breakdown and the truck was being repaired on being parked on the non-metal portion at the extreme left of the Express Highway on 30-3-1972. At 5.30 a.m. while the said truck was in a stationary position, another truck bearing registration number ORU 139 belonging to the defendant 1 came with a high speed from the opposite direction and dashed the standing truck of the plaintiff-and pushed down the same below the embankment in consequence of which the vehicle ORU 1197 suffered heavy damage. The truck of defendant 1 at the relevant time was being driven by defendant 2. The plaintiff then gave several notices to defendant 1, the owner, as well as defendant 4, the insurer, to get histruck r...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »