Orissa Court July 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.
Chatru Alias Chatrubhuja Bhue Vs. the State
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-17-1986
Reported in: 1987CriLJ1349
B.K. Behera, J.1. On a perusal of the record and upon hearing the learned Counsel for both the sides, we find, for the reasons to follow, that the order of conviction recorded against the appellant under Section 302 of the Penal Code sentencing him to undergo imprisonment for life for having committed the murder of the Juedhar Bagarthi (to be referred to hereinafter as the 'deceased') at village Deng in the district of Bolangir based on some items of circumstantial evidence which, taken by themselves, would not lead to a conclusion of guilt and taken together, would not manacle the appellant inescapably, cannot be allowed to stand.2. It is clear from the evidence of the doctor (P.W. 8), who had conducted the autopsy over the dead body of the deceased, that his death was homicidal in nature. There is no direct evidence of the actual assault on the deceased by the appellant. The case of the prosecution rests solely on circumstantial evidence which, in order to be made the basis of convic...
Kartika Das and anr. Vs. Dhurba Kumar Pradhan and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-16-1986
Reported in: I(1987)ACC30
S.C. Mohapatra, J.1. The owner of the mini-bus (ORS 7436) and his insurer have jointly filed this appeal against the award of compensation by the Tribunal under Section 110-B of the Motor Vehicles Act (in short the Act') on the basis of the claims made by the respondents in an application under Section 110-A of the Act.2. On 25-8-1981 at about 8.00 a.m. Indra Pradhan, father of the claimants-respondents and PW 3, their mother, were proceeding on a rickshaw towards Ainthapali from Sambalpur railway station to the house of their son-in-law. At that time, the mini-bus belonging to the owner-appellant No. 1 caused the accident resulting hi the death of Indra, the husband and fracture of leg of PW 3, his wife. In the claim petition, the two sons claimed compensation of Rs. 80,000/- for death of Indra, their father and Rs. 20,000/- for the injury sustained by their mother, PW 3. The Tribunal has awarded Rs. 45,000/- as compensation for the death of Indra and Rs. 17,000/- for the injury on PW...
Sk. Mangul and Three ors. Vs. State and Two ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-15-1986
Reported in: 62(1986)CLT251; 1986(II)OLR201
B.K. Behera, J.1. In a Sessions Trial in which the opposite party Nos. 2 and 3 have been standing their trial being charged Under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, one of them also being charged Under Section 302 read with Section 109 and Section 294 of the Indian Penal Code, evidence was led by the prosecution and two witnesses to the occurrence (P. Ws. 1 and 2) were examined in the Court' of the learned Sessions Judge, Cuttack. On the prayer made by the counsel for the two accused persons, their cross-examination was deferred. On the basis of the statements made by P. Ws. l and 2, the learned Sessions Judge has allowed an application made by the State to summon the petitioners as the accused persons Under Section 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short, the 'Code') for abetment of the commission of murder.2. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Additional Standing Counsel. Mr. Mund has contended for the petitioners th...
Dandapani Naik Vs. State of Orissa Represented by the Collector and an ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-15-1986
Reported in: 1986(II)OLR391
K.P. Mohapatra, J.1. This is an appeal by the unsuccessful plaintiff in a suit for declaration of title and confirmation of possession.2. That case of the plaintiff shortly stated is that the suit land with an area-of 16.48 acres appertaining to Sabik Khata No. 242 corresponding to Hal Khata No, 379 situated in mouza Budhibar described in greater detail in the plaint schedule originally belonged to Sk. Akbar Mohammed, Jagirdar and proprietor of the estate which vested in the State Government in 1963 by virtue of the provisions of the Orissa Estates Abolition Act. While Sk. Akbar Mohammed was in possession of the suit land included in his Anabadi holding as Nij-chas, he leased out the same in favour of the plaintiff by virtue of an unregistered deed of lease on 10-4-1935 on receipt of Salami of Rs. 1648/- and on an annual rent of Rs. 16.50 and delivered possession thereof. Since then the plaintiff has been in possession of the suit land on his own right as an occupancy raiyat by raising...
Govind Nayak Vs. Shyam Sundar Soni and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-15-1986
Reported in: I(1987)ACC19
S.C. Mohapatra, J.1. Being dissatisfied with the compsnsation of Rs. 23,000/- awarded by the Tribunal against the claim of Rs. 40,000/- under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (in short 'the Act'), the injured claimant has preferred this appeal under Section 110-D of the Act.2. Claimant was the helper of the truck bearing registration No. ORU 3697 and it is not in dispute that he was a workman. While moving in the truck on 4-5-1979 at about 9 p.m. the truck met with an accident. On account of the accident of the truck the claimant sustained injuries resulting in amputation of his right leg below the knee joint leaving a stump. Out of the claim of Rs. 40,000/-, the medical expenses incurred were said to be Rs. 5,000/-.3. Mr. D. Satpathy, the learned Counsel for the appellant, submitted that the complete loss of earning capacity of the youngman aged 25 years who was getting monthly salary of Rs. 300/- with daily allowance of Rs. 5/- is grossly inadequate in the circumstances of this case. Mr....
Nityananda Samantray Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-14-1986
Reported in: AIR1987Ori132
ORDERL. Rath, J. 1. This revision is directed against the judgment passed by the learned Subordinate Judge, Bhubaneswar in O.S. No. 149 of 1982(1) disallowing future interest on the award which has been made rule of, the Court.2. The petitioner had undertaken the work 'Improvement to Jeerang-Koinpur Road' in agreement No. 531F-2 of 1972-73 for an amount of Rs. 8,57,218.60. A dispute having arisen between the parties, the matter was referred to the arbitration and the sole Arbitrator submitted a non-reasoned lump-sum award of Rs. 3,12,914/- including interest @ 12 per cent per annum from the date of the award till the date of the final payment or decree whichever is earlier. After the award was submitted in the Court, both the parties were noticed to file their objections. After hearing the parties the award was remitted back to the Arbitrator for specification of the claimed amount and the interest awarded by him and to re-submit the award.3. The Arbitrator re-submitted the award as pe...
Kailash Chandra Sahoo Vs. Mahani Charan Mohanty and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-14-1986
Reported in: AIR1986Ori286; 62(1986)CLT261; 1986(II)OLR173
ORDERL. Rath, J.1. The petitioner who is the plaintiff in the trial court has filed this revision as against the order dated 6-1-1983 passed by the Additional Subordinate Judge, Cuttack in Title Suit No. 25 of 1980/1982 rejecting the petition filed by the petitioner under O. 14, Rule 2, Civil P.C, to decide issue No. 3 as a preliminary issue. Issue No. 3 is as follows : --'Does the suit abate in view of consolidation operation in the suit village?'2. The petitioner's case is that he had purchased properties from opp. party No. 1 who was defendant No. 1 in the trial court and had been allotted the properties in a previous mutual partition between defendants 1, 2 and 3. It is the petitioner's case that he had purchased the suit properties from the opp. party No. 1, but however then he went to possess the property covered under the sale deed, he was prevented therefrom by opp. parties 2 and 3 and on the petitioner's approaching opp. party No. 1. he pleaded his inability and hence the peti...
Babaji Alias Bijia Mallik Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-14-1986
Reported in: 62(1986)CLT393; 1986(II)OLR228
G.B. Pattnaik, J.1. Petitioner has been convicted Under Section 376 Indian Penal Code, for having committed rape on a young girl of five years' old, (P. W. 1) on 12-2-1979 at 6.30 p.m. and has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years and to pay a fine of 25/-, in default, to undergo further rigorous imprisonment, for fifteen days, by the trial Judge. On appeal, the conviction and sentence have been upheld by the learned Sessions Judge and hence the revision.2. It is the prosecution case that on the date of occurrence, just before the sunset, the victim girl wanted to answer the call of nature and requested her grandmother who is since dead, to accompany her, but the grandmother directed the accused who was there, to accompany to victim girl. After the victim girl eased herself and washed in the nearby tank and was returning, the accused lifted her to the cow-shed and removing her frock cohabited with her as a result of which there was profuse bleeding from the va...
Surajmal Khandalwalla and ors. Vs. Krushna Chandra Das and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-14-1986
Reported in: 1986(II)OLR325
K.P. Mohapatra, J.1. This appeal is directed against the order of remand for fresh disposal of Title Suit No. 46 of 1968 passed by the learned District Judge , Baripada.2. The case of the plaintiffs who are the appellants is that they are owners in possession of plot Nos. 12 and 13 pertaining to Khata No. 44/1/40 of the current settlement of mouja Hanada. To the adjoining east of plot No. 13 exists plot No. 14 belonging to the defendants who are the respondents. A green fence separated the boundaries of plot Nos. 13 and 14 On 2. 6 1968 the defendants cut and removed a portion of the green fence and on 22. 6. 1968 they forcibly removed the green fence entirely. Thereafter they encroached upon a portion of plot No. 13 described in detail in schedule Ka-1 of the plaint and constructed a shed on it. As a result, the plaintiffs were not only dispossessed from the encroached land, but also they sustaired less to the extent of Rs. 50/-. Therefore, the plaintiffs instituted the suit for declar...
Chetty Anusuya and ors. Vs. Chetty Balkrishnama
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-14-1986
Reported in: 62(1986)CLT401; 1986(II)OLR169
G.B. Pattnaik, J.1. The petitioner have been convicted Under Section 448, IPC, and have been sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 500/- (five hundred), in default to undergo R.I. for one month each by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Berhampur, in ICC No. 81/77. The accused persons carried on appeal against their conviction in Criminal Appeal No. 163/1980 and the complainant carried a revision to the learned Sessions Judge, Ganjam, in Criminal Revision No. 71 of 1980 as the Magistrate failed to direct the accused persons to vacate the disputed house in favour of the complainant in accordance with Section 456 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Both o these appeal and the revision were disposed of by a common judgment wherein the learned Sessions Judge affirmed the conviction, but modified the sentence of fine reducing the same to Rs. 100/-from Rs. 500/-, in default to undergo S.I. for fifteen days and further directed that the accused persons should restore possession of the disp...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »