Orissa Court August 1989 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.
Batai Chittamma Vs. Revenue Officer-cum-tahasildar, Berhampur and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-18-1989
Reported in: AIR1990Ori136
Pasayat, J. 1. The petitioner has challenged the orders passed by the authorities' under the Orissa Land Reforms Act, 1960 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') holding that she had land in excess of the permissible ceiling. She has prayed for issue of a writ of certiorari to quash the orders passed by the said authorities as contained in Annexures 2, 3 and 4 and for a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ/writs to drop the proceeding against her and to deliver possession in respect of the land taken over, and to declare that she is not a ceiling surplus landholder. 2. The factual backdrop of the case is as follows :-- A proceeding was initiated under Section 42 of the Act against one Batai Mohan. Draft statement was prepared on the basis of information as obtained from the settlement authorities and the same was published on 29-7-1975. The notice issued to the aforesaid Batni Mohan returned back with a remark that he was dead. The petitioner, who is the widow of Batni Mohan,...
Executive Engineer, Sundargarh R. and B. Division and ors. Vs. Mohan P ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-17-1989
Reported in: AIR1990Ori26
G.B. Patnaik, J. 1. Defendants are the appellants against the judgment and decree of the Subordinate Judge, Sundergarh. The plaintiff filed the suit for a declaration that the auction sale of 33.144 M.T. of rod held on 28-2-1979 is valid and binding on the defendants and for such other relief as the court may deem fit and proper in law and equity.2. It is alleged in the plaint that an auction sale notice had been issued by defendant 1 and was published in the daily 'Samaj' for auction of 37.144 metric tons of cut pieces rod and the auction was scheduled to be held on 28-2-1979. The intending bidders were required to deposit Rs. 342/- and accordingly the plaintiff deposited the said amount and participated in the auction. The plaintiff gave the highest bid of Rs. 42,200/- and the auction was knocked down in favour of the plaintiff and he was directed to deposit the earnest money. Accordingly, the plaintiff deposited Rs. 10,050/-. Thereafter the plaintiff approached the authority to acce...
Officiating Common Manager, Bhingarpur Debottar Estate and anr. Vs. Br ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-17-1989
Reported in: AIR1990Ori190
G.B. Patnaik, J.1. This second appeal is by the contesting defendants in a suit for declaration of title of the plaintiff over 'A' schedule land with the house standing thereon and for, delivery of possession of the same to the plaintiff and further if it is found that defendant No. 1 has title to the extent of 15 annas 6 pies, then for partition and to carve out the plaintiff's share of 6 pies in the property.2. The plaintiff's case is that Bhahman Nijog of Uttar Bada and Dakshina Banda consisting of Bhahmin Supakars are the Sebaits of Lord Lingaraj and the said organisation resolved that the President of the Nijog should file the suit. The suit plot No. 737 belonged'to Choudhury family of Bingharpur. Several houses stood on the same which were being used by members of the family. Ac.0.005 decimals out of the said plot was acquired for the purpose of road and the balance Ac.0.046 decimals is the suit land in which the family Deity Gopinath Deb had 15 annas 6 pies interest and Choudhur...
Kumud Mahapatra and anr. Vs. Abhina Mallick and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-17-1989
Reported in: 69(1990)CLT50; 1990CriLJ2646
ORDERK.P. Mohapatra, J.1. This is a petition under Section 439(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as 'the Code') for cancellation of bail granted to opposite party Nos. 1 and 2 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jajpur. The first petitioner is the widow of the deceased and the second is the informant.2. Stated in brief as revealed from the FIR and the charge-sheet the facts of the prosecution case are that deceased Sagar Mahapatra (hereinafter referred to as 'the deceased'), ex-Sarpanch of village Bada Beruan was returning to his village on 11-8-1988 on a Luna-Moped by the Grama Panchayat Road. At about 5.00 p.m. he was near village Taluri. The opposite party Nos. 1 and 2 armed with lathis waylaid him. One of them dealt a blow on the head, as a result of which, the deceased fell down on the ground. Thereafter, both the opposite parties repeatedly assaulted him by means of the lathis on different parts of his body. Some persons working in the nearby fie...
State of Orissa Vs. Bata Alias Khandi Sethi
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-17-1989
Reported in: 1990CriLJ1087
K.P. Mohapatra, J.1. These two cases arise out of Sessions Trial No. 72 of 1982 of the Court of the Sessions Judge, Cuttack. The appellant, in one case was convicted under Section 302 I.P.C. and was sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life. The other accused persons in the said case who were tried along with the appellant for offences under Sections 302, 323 and 324 read with Section 34 I.P.C. were found not guilty and were acquitted. The State has preferred the other appeal against the order of acquittal of only one of the accused.2. The prosecution case in brief is that P.Ws. 1 to 7 and the accused persons are agnates. Their houses and Baris in the village are at one place. Deceased Purna was the natural born son of P.W. 7 and his wife (P.W. 6) and was the adopted son of P.W. 1, the informant and his wife (P.W. 3). P.Ws. 2 and 4 are the brothers of the deceased and P.W. 5 is his widow. These persons, whom we shall refer to as the 'prosecution party' whenever necessary, had long sta...
Braja Behera and ors. Vs. Gandaram Behera and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-10-1989
Reported in: AIR1990Ori94; 69(1990)CLT26
S.C. Mohapatra, J.1. Plaintiffs are the appellants against dismissal of the suit for partition. Relationship of the parties shall be clear from the following genealogy :-- Bharat (dead) _____________________________________________________________ Braja | | | | | | P.1 Gandaram Hemsagar Bhamro Bui Mistri Kunda | D. 1 D. 4 D. 6 D.7 (dead) D. 10 | | | Issueless | | | Bhagban Chandra- | | | D. 3 bati D. 9 | | | | | | ___________|______ | | | | __________________________________| | Daman Minketan | | | | | D. 2 D.3 Suban Kundan Jagmohan Thabir | D.11 D.12 D.13 D.14 | ___________________________|_______________ | | | | Mitrabhanu Nanda- Satya- Handu P. 2 bhanu P.3 nanda P.4 P.52. Plaintiffs claiming plaintiff No. 1 to be the son of Kubera through his second wife filed the suit for partition of his half share in the ancestral properties of Kubera Defendants claimed that plaintiff No. 1 being son of Kubera through his concubine is illegitimate and has no share in the ancestral properties. Kub...
Gopal Chandra Jena Vs. Sri Laxmi Narayan Bijo Maura Alava and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-09-1989
Reported in: AIR1990Ori98
ORDERL. Rath, J.1. In this revision, the defendant assails an order passed by the Munsif overruling his objection regarding the valuation of the suit for the purpose of jurisdiction and the court-fee paid by the plaintiffs in the suit for a declaration that the deed of gift executed by plaintiff No. 2 on 6-3-1984 was void inasmuch as the defendant, her husband's younger brother, practised fraud upon her to get the gift deed executed in his favour in the garb of execution of a power-of-attorney by her. His submission is that since in essence and substance, the relief claimed by the plaintiffs is for cancellation of the deed and depriving the defendant of his title in the property conveyed under the gift deed, the suit has to be valued on the valuation of the property and ad valorem court-fee has to be paid as required under Section 7(iv)(c) of the Court-fees Act (shortly stated 'the Act'). It is further submitted that the valuation of the property being more than Rs. 50,000/ -, the Muns...
G. Laxminarayana Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-09-1989
Reported in: I(1990)ACC405; 1990ACJ916
J. Das, J. 1. This revision arises out of the appellate order dated 7.5.1985 passed by Mr. D. Kar, Sessions Judge, Koraput, Jeypore, in Criminal Appeal No. 92 of 1984 upholding the conviction and sentence dated 18.10.1984 passed by Mr. U.N. Padhi, Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jeypore in G.R. Case No. 751 of 1981 convicting the petitioner under Sections 279/304A, Indian Penal Code and sentencing him to undergo R.I. for one year for the offence under Section 304A, Indian Penal Code and awarding no separate sentence for the conviction under Section 279, Indian Penal Code.2. It appears that the accused petitioner G. Laxminarayana was the driver of the jeep ORK 4957 and on 5.12.1981 at about 9.15 a.m., the accused was driving the jeep on the National Highway No. 43 towards Jeypore. Near the village Randapalli, the jeep of the accused had to pass by the side of a truck, which had been parked on the road facing towards Borigumma. At the time when the jeep passed by the side of the truck there w...
Surekha Mrudangia Vs. Ramahari Mrudangia
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-07-1989
Reported in: 68(1989)CLT676; 1990CriLJ639
ORDERK.P. Mohapatra, J.1. The interesting point for consideration is whether future salary of a husband can be attached for recovery of arrears of maintenance by the wife in accordance with the procedure laid down in Section 125(3) read with Section 421(1)(a) of the Code of Criminal Procedure ('Code' for short).2. Facts are simple and undisputed, the petitioner wife obtained an order of maintenance against the opposite party-husband under Section 125 of the Code at the rate of Rs. 125/- per month. She filed a petition (registered as Misc. Case No. 87 of 1985) for attachment of the salary of the opposite party. The petition was allowed by the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Berhampur and a writ attaching a sum of Rs. 200/- from the salary of the opposite party per month was issued for execution by the Tahasildar, Berhampur under whom the opposite party was serving as a Mohorir. In the meanwhile, the opposite party filed Title Suit No. 77 of 1988 before the Subordinate Judge,...
Sri Jagannath Aurvedic Pharmacy Vs. House Rent Controller, Cuttack and ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-04-1989
Reported in: AIR1990Ori168
Pasayat, J. 1. Petitioner, a tenant under the Orissa House Rent Control Act, 1967 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), has moved this Court in an application under Arts. 226 and 227 of the Constitution with a prayer for issue of a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ quashing the order dt. 23-9-1988 passed in M.R.C. Case No. 50 of 1987 pending in the Court of the House Rent Controller, Cuttack (hereinafter referred to as 'the Controller') holding that the proceeding before him was maintainable and a further prayer for declaring that the Controller has no jurisdiction to proceed with the aforesaid case and that all actions taken by him after 4-5-1988 are without jurisdiction and null and void. 2. The challenge as indicated in the writ application and the submissions made before us is based on a very short and interesting argument that after 4-5-1988 the Act ceased to have effect and therefore, any action taken in a proceeding which was instituted under the said Act, prior...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »