Orissa Court May 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.
Dr. Bhabendra Kumar Pattnaik Vs. Dr. Chandi Charan Das
Court: Orissa
Decided on: May-03-1986
Reported in: 61(1986)CLT668; 1986(I)OLR656
S.C. Mohapatra, J.1. Delinquent is the petitioner in this criminal revision which arises out of proceeding under Section 107, Criminal Procedure Code.2. The Officer-in-Charge of Gopalpur Police station submitted a report on 26-4-1985 to bind down the petitioner to keep peace in the locality where he described the opp. party as first party and the delinquent as the second party. On 6thJune, 1985, the learned Executive Magistrate passed the order directing the petitioner to appear on 21-6-1985 and show cause as to. why he shall not be directed to execute a bond for Rs. 500/-with one surety for the like amount to keep peace for a period of six months. After appearance of the delinquent the proceeding continued where some of the witnesses were examined and the case was posted to 16-1-1986 for further enquiry by order dated 9-1-1986. The next day, i.e., on 10-1-1986, an application was filed on behalf of the opposite party stating therein that the witnesses in this case have already been ex...
Samru Singh Vs. Dhanamani Singh
Court: Orissa
Decided on: May-03-1986
Reported in: 1986(I)OLR683
S.C. Mohapatra, J.1. Petitioner filed an application for dissolution of his marriage with opposite party by a decree of divorce under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act')- After taking some adjournments for filing the written statement, the opposite party filed an application under Section 24 of the Act asking for Rs. 1000/- towards expenses of the proceeding and maintenance pendente lite @ Rs. 400/- per month asserting in the application that she had no independent income to meet the expenses of the proceeding filed against her and to maintain herself. In the application, she alleged that the petitioner, an employee under the Steel Authority of India Limited. Rourkela Steel Plant, Rourkela, was drawing a monthly salary of Rs. 1200/- and has various luxurious articles along with two houses and lands in village Jhirpani and Shaktinagar. Petitioner challenged the aforesaid averments as untrue and asserted his take home salary to be Rs. 850/- only wherefrom ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›