Orissa Court February 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.
Sesadev Nanda Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Feb-28-1986
Reported in: 1986(I)OLR368
G.B. Pattnaik, J. 1. The petitioner has been convicted under Section 409, I. P. C, and has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 2000/- or in default to undergo further imprisonment for six months by the Chief Judicial Magistrate. Puri, and on appeal, the said conviction and sentence have been affirmed by the learned Additional Sessions judge, Puri.2. According to the prosecution case the petitioner was the Sarpanch of Uchhupur Grama Panchayat in the year 1976. In accordance with the resolution of the Panchayat to deal with the controlled commodities, the petitioner filed an application before the Block Development Officer to make arrangement for supply of controlled commodities to the Panchayat for distribution amongst the villagers. On 21.9.1976 the petitioner as the Sarpanch lifted 14 quintals of sugar from the Food Corporation of India in accordance with the orders of the Block Development Officer, Nimapara and the said stock was bein...
Sk. MinhasuddIn Moula Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Feb-28-1986
Reported in: 1986(I)OLR374
G.B. Pattnaik, J.1. Petitioner has invoked the inherent jurisdiction of this Court and has prayed for quashing the cognisance taken by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Nimapara, in G. R. Case No. 223 of 1984 under Section 363. Indian Penal Code. According to the petitioner he is a permanent resident of Charinagal under Barchana Police Station, but is serving as an Arabic teacher at Bangalore. On the basis of a First information Report lodged by one Kariman Bibi, P. S. Case No. 86 of 1984 was instituted by the Officer-in-charge of Nimapara Police Station. The allegations in the said F. I. R. are to the effect that the petitioner has kidnapped the minor girl of the informant on 22.5.1984 by practising some witchcraft and the age of the girl is 13 years. The Police in course of investigation also recorded the statements of several witnesses. Charge-sheet has not yet been field in this case and at this stage, the present petitioner has moved this Court for quashing the proceedings.2. The m...
Namitarani Bose Vs. Dipak Kumar Bose
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Feb-28-1986
Reported in: 61(1986)CLT448; 1986(I)OLR402
G.B. Pattnaik, J.1. Petitioner who is the wife and had filed an application under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as the Code has prayed for enhancement of monthly maintenance granted by the learned Magistrate. Before this case was taken up for hearing on the request of the counsel for the opposite party, the records of Criminal Revision No. 37 of 1985 filed by the husband challenging the order of the Magistrate were brought from the Court of the Second Additional Sessions Judge Cuttack and the said revision after being registered in this Court as Criminal Revision No. 111 of 1986 was also heard along with Criminal Revision No. 106 of 1985 and both the cases are being disposed of by this common judgment.2. The averments in the application filed under Section 125 of the Code are to the effect that the marriage between the petitioner and opposite party took place on 4.5.1974 and both of them continued to live as husband and wife till June 1975, thou...
Jagannath Sahoo Vs. State of Orissa and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Feb-25-1986
Reported in: 61(1986)CLT426; 1986(I)OLR342
B.K. Behera, J. 1. While functioning as an Assistant Teacher in the Capital High School, Unit-Ill, Bhubaneswar, the petitioner was proceeded against as per the charge-sheet ( Annexure-4) in a disciplinary proceeding for violation of the order of his transfer from that school to the High School at Badagada and for disobedience of the order of his superiors, The petitioner showed cause as per Annexure-5. Ultimately, his services were terminated by the order dated July 29. 1982, passed by the Inspector of Schools, Puri Circle, as per Annexure-12. The period of absence from duty of the petitioner from March 11, 1980 to September 3, 1982, was treated to be extraordinary leave as per Annexure-13 Later a consolidated order was passed as per Annexure-15, terminating the services of the petitioner and treating the period of absence from duty as extraordinary leave.2. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. R. K. Patra the learned Additional Government Advocate. At the stage...
Rai Singh and Subash Kumar Ghosh and anr. Vs. United Commercial Bank a ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Feb-25-1986
Reported in: 1986(I)OLR393
S.C. Mohapatra, J.1. These two appeals arise out of two applications for setting aside an ex parte decree. The decree is common in both the cases. The parties are also same. Accordingly, they are heard together and disposed of by this common judgment.2. Money Suit No. 88 of 1979 in the Court of the Subordinate Judge, Sambalpur, was posted to 11.2.1981. On that date defendants 1 and 2 filed an application for time, defendant No. 3 also filed another application for time on that day. Both the applications were rejected and all the defendants were set ex parte. The learned Subordinate Judge, however, recorded his inability to dispose of the suit ex Parte on the ground of absence of the Stenographer, who was on leave. On 12.3.1981 to which date the case was posted, the learned Subordinate Judge was engaged in the hearing of Title Suit No. 48 of 1977 and could not get time for ex parte hearing of the suit. Though the defendants were set ex parte on 11-2-1981, no steps were taken to get the ...
Kishanlal Singh and Four ors. Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Feb-24-1986
Reported in: 1986(I)OLR386
B.K. Behera, J.1. The five appellants with four co-accused persons stood trial in the Court of Mr. S. S. Sahani, Assistant Sessions Judge, Baripada, being charged under Sections 457 and 395 of the Indian Penal Code (for short the 'Code'). The appellants and the other culprits, it was alleged, committed house-breaking by entering into the dwelling house of Himanshu Sekhar Dey in his absence during the night of December 15/16, 1981, at about 2.00 A. M. and committed dacoity by assaulting one of the inmates and two neighbours and removing a number of articles belonging to Himanshu Sekhar Dey. On the basis of first information report lodged by the wife of Himanshu Sekhar Dey, as per Ext. 4, investigation was taken up in the course of which the appellants and some other suspects were arrested on December 19, 1981, the persons who had sustained injuries at the hand of the culprits were medically examined, witnesses were examined, seizures of some articles alleged to have been recovered on th...
Chaitan Pradhan and anr. Vs. State
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Feb-21-1986
Reported in: 61(1986)CLT365; 1986(I)OLR347
B.K. Behera, J. 1. I have heard the learned counsel for both the sides in this revision directed against the order passed by Mr. A.C. Panda, First Additional Sessions Judge, Puri, while holding his circuit Court at Nayagarh, dismissing the Criminal Appeal preferred by the present petitioners 'without costs'. The orders passed are extracted below :'Order No. 9 dated 23.1.1986 :The appellant files petition for time. Heard. Time is rejected. The appellant is directed to be ready for hearing at once.Sd. A.C. Panda1st Addl.Sessions Judge, Puri,Camp at Nayagarh.Later :The appellant takes no steps. A. P. P. is present. The appeal is dismissed without costs.'2. The Criminal Appeal had been admitted and hid been posted for hearing. Section 386 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short, 'the Code' ) provides that after perusing the record and hearing the appellant or his pleader, if he appears, and the Public Prosecutor if he appears, the appellate Court may, if it considers that there is no ...
Chandra Sekhar Parida Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Feb-21-1986
Reported in: 1986(I)OLR358
G.B. Pattnaik, J. 1. The petitioner has been convicted under Section 354, Indian Penal Code, and has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one month by Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Khurda, and on appeal the said conviction and, sentence have been affirmed by the Sessions Judge, Puri.2. According to the prosecution case, on 25-8-1977 at 2 p. m. one Tukuna, was. going to her master's house when the accused called her and embraced her. When the victim raised alarm the accused gagged her mouth. Ultimately the girl could release herself. A report to this effect was lodged at the police station orally which was reduced to writing and was treated as F. I. R. and the Police then investigated into the offence. After completion of investigation police submitted charge-sheet. The defence plea is one of denial and further according to the defence a false case has been foisted as there was a party faction in the village and the accused belonged to the rival faction. 3. The victim...
Srikanta Kumar Panda Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Feb-21-1986
Reported in: 1986(I)OLR365
G.B. Pattnaik, J.1. This is an application, invoking the inherent jurisdiction of this Court with the prayer to quash the proceedings in Miscellaneous Case No. 55/83 in the Court of the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Banpur.2. The short facts of the case are that the petitioner was the Circle Inspector of Police at Khurda and was summoned to be a witness in G. R. Case No. 129/82 pending in the Court of the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Banpur. The summons in question was sent to him by registered post which was returned back with the endorsement that the petitioner refused to receive the summons. After receipt of the endorsement, the Magistrate took cognisance of the offence under Section 350, Cr. P. C, and issued notice to the petitioner to show cause as to why he should not be punished under Section 350, Cr. P. C. Pursuant to the said notice to show cause the petitioner submitted a show cause indicating therein that he had never refused any postal summons and, therefore, there...
Mahabir Prasad Agarwalla (Dead) After Him Shanti Devi and ors. Vs. Sta ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Feb-19-1986
Reported in: 1986(I)OLR361
S.C. Mohapatra, J.1. This is an appeal under Section 39 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'). 2. Appellant is a works contractor. He entered into agreement with the respondent for execution of some works, details of which are not necessary, relating to Express Way. A written agreement was entered into which was No. 45-F2 of 1968-69.3. After the payment of the final bill, the appellant raised some disputes relating to the work executed by him, As per the clause in the written agreement, the Chief Engineer appointed Sri N.C. Pani, Superintending Engineer to be the Arbitrator. Claims on the statement and counter-statement were filed by the parties before Sri Pani After fixing the hearing and adjourning the same for some dates, Sri Pani expressed his unwillingness to continue as the Arbitrator. Accordingly, the Chief Engineer appointed Sri N. N. Panda to be the Arbitrator. Sri Panda entered into reference by calling upon the appellant to file his statement of...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »