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.
Motwali Sk. Kausar and anr. Vs. State of Orissa and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Oct-01-1986
Reported in: 63(1987)CLT526; 1986(II)OLR588
G.B. Pattnaik, J.1. In this writ petition, the petitioners question the legality of the order of opposite party No. 4 dated 20-2-1978, annexed as Annexure-5, by which order he reviewed his earlier order dated 5-4-1977 and also the legality of the order dated 12-10-1982 passed by the Member, Board of Revenue, in exercise of his power Under Section 38-B of the Orissa Estates Abolition Act, annexed as Annexure 9.After stating the facts it is found :4. It is necessary to state some admitted features of this case before entering into a discussion on the merits of the contentions raised by counsel on their side. The properties in question are the waqf properties of mosque, Juma Masjid and Sk. Wahabullah was the Motwali. Though the lands vested under the provisions of the Orissa Estates Abolition Act on 18-3-1974, no application had been filed to the Collector under the said Act for settlement within the stipulated period. The application which was filed in the year 1976 by Sk. Rasul Bux, the...
Kuntala Misra Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Oct-01-1986
Reported in: 1986CriLJ1917
L. Rath, J.1. The appellant having been convicted under Section 302, Penal Code and sentenced to life imprisonment on the charge of having committed murder of her daughter-in-law, Gitanjali on 11-1-1983 at about 2-30 p.m. has preferred this appeal.2. The prosecution case, briefly sketched, is that the deceased Gitanjali was married to Subash, the son of the appellant on 24-5-1981. There was demand of dowry to which the father and brother of Gitanjali did not agree at the first instance, but subsequently it was settled at Rs. 8,000/- to be paid after the marriage. The dowry was however demanded on the date of marriage which demand could not be complied with. Due to such reason there was strained feelings between the two families for which the appellant and her son were torturing Gitanjali and were not allowing her to come to her parent' place at Banpur from Sambalpur where the appellant was working as a Dai in the maternity Hospital and had a quarter inside the Hospital premises where a...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›