Orissa Court August 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.
State Vs. V. Satyanarayan Murty
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-23-1985
Reported in: 1985(II)OLR598
S.C. Mohapatra, J.1. Ground-nut oil in an Agmarked sealed container was found on analysis to be adultered and the respondent who stored the container in his retail shop to sell for human consumption as prosecuted for having committed an offence under Section 16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1951 (hereinafter called 'the Act') Two others were also prosecuted on the allegation that they were the manufacturer and wholesaler of the said ground-nut oil. On trial of the accused persons, all of them were acquitted. The State selected the respondent only against whom this appeal has been preferred. Being of the prima facie view that all the accused persons should be heard simultaneously to arrive at the just decision in this appeal, notice was issued by this Court for revising the order of acquittal against them. Notice was also issued to P. W. 1, the Food Inspector to explain in this Court some of the infirmities found by the trial Court for acquitting the accused persons.2. Pro...
Pankajini Das and anr. Vs. Hrushikesh and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-22-1985
Reported in: AIR1986Ori184
P.C. Misra, J. 1. The plaintiffs have preferred this appeal against the judgment and decree of the Subordinate Judge of Sambalpur passed in Title Suit No. 3 of 1971, The suit is one for a decree of maintenance and for recovery of arrear of maintenance as also for separate residence.2. Plaintiff No. 2 is the son of Plaintiff No. 1. Plaintiff No. 1 is the legally married wife of defendant No. i. Defendants Nos. 2 and 3 are the father and mother respectively of defendant No. 1; and defendant No. 4 is the surviving member of another branch whose name stands recorded along with defendant No. 2 in respect of the properties described in the plaint schedule.3. The plaintiffs' case in short is that Plaintiff No. 1 is the legally married wife of defendant No. 1 their marriage having taken place in the year 1961. Plaintiff No. 2 was born out of their wedlock in the month of Sravan in the year 1964 and was thus a minor when the suit was instituted. According to Plaintiff No. 1, she was being ill-t...
Kanhu Gauda Vs. D. Kodandi Dora and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-20-1985
Reported in: AIR1986Ori191; 60(1985)CLT453
ORDERR.C. Patnaik, J. 1. This revision raises the question whether rejection of an application under Order 1, Rule 10, Sub-rule (2) of the Code of Civil Procedure for addition of a party operates as res judicata if at a later stage of the suit an application is made under Order 6, Rule 17 of the Code to implead the said party.2. The petitioner brought an action for declaration of title, confirmation of possession and the relief of permanent injunction. He alleged that his father purchased the property in dispute in 1963 by a registered sale deed from one D. Buchibabu Dora who was the brother of defendant No. 1. In a partition, which took place around 1949, Defendant No. 1 (Opposite party No. 1) and his brothers, namely, D. Buchibabu Dora and D. Rammurty Dora, were allotted specific properties and the property in dispute was in possession and enjoyment of D. Buchibabu Dora. There was some mistake in the description of property. Registered document rectifying the mistake was obtained in ...
Ghanashyam Mishra Vs. State of Orissa Represented by the Secretary to ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-20-1985
Reported in: 1985(II)OLR409
R.C. Patnaik, J.1. The petitioner has assailed the order of termination dated November 3, 1979 issued by the District Inspector of Schools, Chatrapur, (opposite party No. 3) temporarily terminating the service of the petitioner with effect from March 31, 1979 and directing deduction of the amount paid to him from April 1, 1979 till termination from the amount available to him in the Provident Fund deposit and the disciplinary proceeding initiated as per Annexure-4, dated November 16, 1979.2. The petitioner joined as a teacher in a Lower Primary School in 1941. He had read upto Class VIII and had undergone training. In 1978, he was called upon to produce the certificate indicating his qualifications and date of birth. As the petitioner had lost the original certificate, he applied for a duplicate and submitted the same to the authorities. On October 31, 1979 he was called upon by the Block Development Officer, Polosara, to produce his academic and training certificates in original as it...
Sri Narayan GosaIn and ors. Vs. the Collector, Cuttack and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-19-1985
Reported in: AIR1986Ori47; 60(1985)CLT514
K.P. Mohapatra, J. 1. PetitionerNo. 1 is deity Sri Sri Narayan Gosain of Singapur. Petitioners 2 to 7 are some of the villagers who claim to represent the deity. In this writ petition they have prayed for quashing of Annexures 1 and 2, both relating to long term lease of a tank in favour of opposite party No. 2 for pisciculture. Their case in brief is that the stone image of the deity held in great veneration by the people of Singapur within the former estate of Madhupur remains submerged under the water of the disputed tank within an area Ac. 5.33 decimals appertaining to plot No. 141 in Khata No. 241 of mouza Singapur throughout the year except on three days during Pana Sankranti. The Sebavats, the residents of Singapur and the people of neighbouring village offer Seva Puja to the deity on the bank and in the water of the tank. During Pana Sankranti the stone image of the deity is taken out of the water of the tank, installed in the temple and is worshipped by thousands of people dur...
Bhramarbar Dhal Vs. the State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-19-1985
Reported in: 1985(II)OLR353
K.P. Mohapatra, J.1. This revision is directed against the order passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Cuttack, confirming the order passed by learned Sub-divisional Judicial Magistrate, Athgarh, convicting the petitioner under Section 9(a) of the Opium Act and sentencing him to undergo simple imprisonment for one month.2. The prosecution case in short is that P.. W. 1, a Sub-Inspector of Excise searched the house of the petitioner in the presence of witnesses after observing the necessary legal formalities and seized 20 grams of opium, a receptacle, an opium cutting knife, a weighing scale and a few coins from the petitioner's bed room and seized the aforesaid articles by seizure-list (Ext-1), For possession of opium, the petitioner had no licence. After close of Investigation P. W. 1 submitted prosecution report against the petitioner.3. The plea of the petitioner was that he had, no knowledge about the search of his house and seizure of opium and other articles from his bed room. He...
Agadhu Charan Giri Vs. the Commercial Manager, Indian Airlines and anr ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-19-1985
Reported in: 1985(II)OLR513
K.P. Mohapatra, J.1. The petitioner has challenged the order dated 11. 3. 1983 passed by opposite party No. 2 in Annexura 1 removing him from service.2. The case of the petitioner in brief is that he was serving as a Porter of the Indian Airlines Corporation in the eastern region and was posted to Bhubaneswar Airport. On the allegations that on 10. 9. 1981 alongwith some other persons he trespassed into the house of Shri S. K. Choudhury, Senior Traffic Assistant, abused and manhandled him and further trespassed into the house of Shri A. R. Sen, Traffic Assistant and abused and assaulted him, a disciplinary proceeding was started against him, he was placed under suspension and charges were framed against him. Simultaneously, Shri S. K. Choudhury lodged F. I. R. on allegations of assault at Bhubaneswar Police Station on the basis of which G. R. Case No. 2009 of 1981 was initiated in the Court of the Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Bhubaneswar. After investigation, the Investigating O...
Dr. Arjun Chandra Naik Vs. the State of Orissa and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-16-1985
Reported in: AIR1985Ori300
K.P. Mohapatra, J.1. The petitioner serves as Divisional Medical Officer in a senior Class I post of the Central Government. At present he is posted at Khurda Road Division of the South-Eastern Railways. He claims to belong to the Scheduled Tribes. Having already completed service for over five years under the Central Government including rural service, he applied for admission to the Post-Graduate Course ('P. G. Course' for short) in general medicine In one of the three Medical Colleges in Orissa for the academic session1983-84. Although he was eligible for selection in all respects, he was not selected. He again applied for admission for the academic session1984-85 for the same course. Although he was eligible for selection for one of the seats reserved for Scheduled Tribes candidates and some seats are still vacant, he was wrongly refused admission on the ground that there was no reservation for Medical Officers servingunder the Central Government belonging to Scheduled Castes and S...
State Vs. Biswanath Agarwalla and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-16-1985
Reported in: 1986(10)ECC10; 1987(27)ELT27(Ori)
G.B. Patnaik, J. 1. This appeal is directed against the appellate order of the learned Sessions Judge, Mayurbhanj Baripada, in Criminal Appeal No. 66-M of 1978 acquitting the respondents of the charge under Section 9(1)(b) of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act').2. The two respondents who are the Manager and Proprietor respectively of the firm called M/s. Mayurbhanj Match Manufacturing Company, Rairangpur, faced trial before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mayurbhanj, for having committed offences under Section 9(1) (b) and (bb) of the Act on the allegation that they evaded the payment of duty under the Act and contravened the provisions of statutory rules, made under the Act. The respondents are engaged in manufacturing match in their factory at Rairangpur and match is an excisable commodity, for removal of which, duty is payable under the Act. The Superintendent of Central Excise (P.W.5) having received some information that the accused-respond...
State of Orissa Vs. Tarinisen Mahanto and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-13-1985
Reported in: 60(1985)CLT274; 1985(II)OLR266
P.C. Misra, J.1. The unsuccessful plaintiff in T. S. No. 1 of 1971 of the Court of the Subordinate Judge, Keonjhar, is the appellant in this appeal. The suit was one for declaration of right, title and interest in respect of the disputed tank and also for a declaration that the order in Cri. Misc. Case No. 18 of 1969 is illegal and inoperative and for recovery of possession of the suit properties described in the schedule appended to the plaint. The plaint describes the suit properties to be a tank comprising of plot No. 397 area A. 2.83 decimals and plot No. 399 area A. 0. 31 decimals, total A. 3. 19 decimals, appertaining to khata No. 61 in mouza Machhagarh in the district of Keonjhar.2. The case of the plaintiff (State of Orissa) in brief as described in the plaint is as follows :' During the Darbar administration the grandfather of the first defendant excavated the tank in dispute at his own expenses for the benefit of the villagers after obtaining the permission of the State. It i...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »