Orissa Court October 1986 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.
Balabhadra Patra and ors. Vs. Chief Engineer and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Oct-30-1986
Reported in: [1987(54)FLR14]; (1995)IIILLJ591Ori
S.C. Mohapatra, J. 1. This appeal by the claimants is under Section 30 of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 (in short 'the Act'), challenging the quantum of compensation awarded by the Commissioner under the Act.2. No appeal having been preferred the finding regarding the death of the workman in course of employment, his monthly wage, the right of the claimants to compensation and the liability of the employer-respondent to the extent awarded has become final. Accordingly, the facts out of which the claim arose are not necessary to be stated.3. On the death of the workman, the claimants filed an application in the prescribed Form-G, wherein serial No. 6, it was stated as follows:'The applicants are accordingly entitled to receive lump sum payment of Rs. 7,000/-.'The Commissioner held that the claimants are entitled to Rs. 13,500/- but the claim being for Rs. 7,000/- only the higher amount to which the claimants are entitled is not to be awarded. He confined the award to Rs. 7,000/- ...
Lobi Dei and anr. Vs. Kubera Balabantara and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Oct-29-1986
Reported in: 64(1987)CLT289; 1986(II)OLR679
P.C. Misra, J.1. This revision at the instance of defendants 1 (kha) and 2 is against the order of the Munsif, Puri, dated 6-7-1983 passed in OS. No. 35 of 1975-1 allowing substitution of the legal representatives of plaintiff No. 2. The facts relevant for the purposes of this revision are as follows: The plaintiffs in the aforesaid suit prayed for declaration of title, confirmation of possession and for injunction against the defendants in respect of certain trees standing over the suit plot. The suit was dismissed on contest by the learned trial Court by his judgment dated 12-2-1979. The unsuccessful plaintiff preferred Title Appeal No. 33/29 of 1982/1979 and the appellate Court disposed of the appeal on 1-10-1982 remanding the same to the trial Court with a direction to give findings afresh on all the issues, taking into consideration the entire evidence on record after appointment of a fresh commissioner and taking evidence, if any, adduced by both the parties after the report of t...
Mandari Rewa and ors. Vs. Jagabandhu Ghadei and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Oct-29-1986
Reported in: I(1987)ACC304
S.C. Mohapatra, J.1. Legal representatives of the injured claimant are the appellants in this appeal purporting to be under Section 110-D of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (in short 'the Act').2. As a result of an accident caused by the truck bearing registration No. ORU 9233 on the Express High Way near Badapal on 6-8-1979 at 8 a.m., the claimant sustained fracture of the left leg, left elbow and injuries on other parts of the body. He was admitted as an indoor patient in the Government Hospital at Kendrapara and was transferred to S.G.B. Medical College Hospital on the next day. On that account, he claimed compensation of Rs. 30,000/-. After the case was made ready for hearing, an application was filed by the learned Counsel for the claimant that the petitioner died on 11-5-1982 for which substitution was necessary. The Tribunal posted the case to 3-6-1982 for taking steps for substitution. No step for substitution, however, was taken and the case was adjourned from day to day till 20t...
Mewa Devi and ors. Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Oct-29-1986
Reported in: I(1987)ACC67
S.C. Mohapatra, J.1. Claimants are the appellants in these two appeals under Section 110-D of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939, (for short 'the Act'). As both the appeals arise out of the same accident, they are heard together and are disposed of by this common judgment.2. On 14-4-1977, in the night the truck bearing registration No. ORU 9476 of the Police Department caused an accident in which Debi Sahaya Gupta and his daughter Usha received fatal injuries to succumb at the spot. On that account two claim petitions were filed. The mother, widow, son and three daughters of Debi Sahaya filed a claim petition under Section 110-A of the Act. All others except Kasturi Devi, the mother of Debi Sahaya, filed another claimed petition for the death of Usha Devi.3. It has been found that deceased Debi Sahaya was a partner in a firm having one-fourth interest wherefrom he was contributing to the family. Deceased Usha Devi aged 10 years was reading in the school. The death of Debi Sahaya and Usha Dev...
Sarat Chandra Patra Vs. Narasingha Patra and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Oct-28-1986
Reported in: AIR1988Ori4; 63(1987)CLT86
ORDERS.C. Mohapatra, J. 1. The facts giving rise to this civil revision are as follows : -- On 14-5-1966, Sadhavani Patrani obtained a decree for recovery of possession of a double storied building in Jeypore town. She executed the decree in Execution Proceeding No. 35 of 1966. During its pendency, she expired on 20-11-1968. The petitioner filed an application on 7-1-1969 to be substituted in place of the deceased decree-holder as her legal representative alleging that Sadhavani executed a Will in his favour and registered it on 23-12-1959 and a Codicil on 25-9-1967 apart from adopting him as a son. The judgment-debtors objected to the said application. Enquiry was conducted on the application of the petitioner and one witness was examined on commission. At the stage the objection of the judgment-debtors that they are real successors was directed by order dated 16-1-1970 to be registered as a Misc. Case under Section 47, C.P.C. The relevant portion of the order reads as follows : -- '....
Smt. Annapurna Das Vs. Sri Binayak Biro and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Oct-28-1986
Reported in: 63(1987)CLT26; 1986(II)OLR636
K.P. Mohapatra, J.1. How proceedings are conducted in lower Courts in a cavalier fashion is best illustrated by these three criminal revisions arising out of a common order passed by the learned Executive Magistrate of Parlakhemundi which were heard analogously and shall be governed by this judgment.2. The land in dispute, with an area of about one acre situated in village Nuagada, is the subject-matter of a. proceeding Under Section 145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure ('Code' for short). On a police report to the effect that there was apprehension of breach of peace relating to the possession of the disputed land between the petitioner a widow and the opposite parties being members of the second party, a preliminary order was drawn up on 30-7-1977 and the disputing parties were called upon to file their statements. Both the parties in their statements claimed possession in respect thereof. After a protracted proceeding lasting upto the month of June of the year 1982, when perhaps th...
United India Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Draupadi Behera and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Oct-28-1986
Reported in: I(1987)ACC85
P.C. Misra, J.1. This is an appeal under Section 11Q-D of the Motor Vehicles Act in which the United India Insurance Company has challenged its liability to pay the compensation awarded.2. One Kasinath Behera of Kalupada, P.S. Purusottampur died in a motor accident on 30-3-1982 near village Palia, Chatrapur on the National High Way No. 5. His widow and mother claimed compensation before the Second Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Berhampur against the owner and the driver who caused the accident. Initially the name of the Insurance Company was not disclosed in the application filed under Section 110-A of the Act. It was merely against column No. 16 which is the relevant place mentioning the same that the address of the Insurance Company will be disclosed after the appearance of the owner in the case. The owner, however, did not appear to contest the claim of the claimants. An application was filed by the claimants praying to amend the application by impleading M/s United India Insurance...
Banshidhar SwaIn Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Oct-28-1986
Reported in: 63(1987)CLT99; 1987CriLJ1819
ORDERK.P. Mohapatra, J.1. The revision is against the order passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Sundargarh confirming the order of conviction and sentence of the petitioner under Section 223 of the Penal Code ('I.P.C for short).2. The prosecution case in a nutshell is that the petitioner while serving as Police Constable No. 462 was entrusted with the duty of escorting accused Kamal Nandi for production in the court of the Judicial Magistrate, Panposh at Uditnagar on 28-1-1980. Accordingly he received the said accused from the court Hazat and was due to return after court-hours At about 5 P.M. it was noticed by the Court Sub-Inspector that although other under-trial prisoners had returned, the petitioner and accused Kamal Naadi had not returned. Therefore, a search was organised and sometime later the petitioner himself returned and made a station diary entry in the Plant-site Police Station, Uditnagar stating that accused Kamal Nandi had escaped from his custody. It is alleged that ...
State of Orissa Vs. Rajanikanta Mohapatra
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Oct-27-1986
Reported in: AIR1988Ori56; 63(1987)CLT390
ORDERS.C. Mohapatra, J. 1. Application under Section 149 Civil Procedure Code has been registered as a Miscellaneous case which is being disposed of by this order. 2. Court-fee of Rs. 603/- is payable by the appellant-petitioner on the memorandum of appeal. Without paying the same, application has been filed to extend the time by four months to pay the court-fee. The relevant portion of the petition reads as follows :-- '1. That today the appellant is filing the appeal without court-fee. 2. That the court-fee payable on the memorandum of appeal is Rs. 603.00 which is to be challaned from the Treasury. 3. That since the amount required for purchasing court-fee was not received from the concerned department in time it has not been possible to file the necessary challan in the Treasury for purchasing court-fee. 4. That it is necessary in the interest of justice that four months' time be granted to the appellant to file the requisite court-fee in this case. Prayer. The appellant, ther...
Jayanti Pradhan Vs. Kunjabehari Pradhan
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Oct-27-1986
Reported in: AIR1987Ori184; 63(1987)CLT417
S.C. Mohapatra, J. 1. This appeal by the wife arises out of an order in a proceeding under Section 9, Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). 2. Respondent filed an application for restitution of conjugal rights. The appellant disputed the application by filing a written statement and later filed an application for amendment of the written statement by incorporating counter-claim for maintenance at the rate of Rs. 300/- per month since the month of October, 1981. The total arrear claim was Rs. 6,900/- and the future claim was Rs. 18,000/- on which it was stated that court-fee payable was Rs. 2,009.25 paise. She was exempted from paying the court-fee under Section 18-A of the Court-fees Act. The trial court dismissed the application for restitution of conjugal rights which being valued notionally at Rs. 100A, appeal was preferred in the court of District Judge, Sambalpur registered as Title Appeal No. 14 of 1985 which is now pending. Trial court not having whisp...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »