Orissa Court December 1990 Judgments
Bhakta Charan Mallik Vs. Nataorar Mallik and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Dec-21-1990
Reported in: AIR1991Ori319
ORDERA.K. Padhi, J.1. Challenging the order rejecting the application for interrogatories under Order 11, Rule 1, C.P.C. the plaintiff has filed this Civil Revision. The suit is for partition.2. In the written statement the defendant took the stand that:(a) Some of the properties belonging to the joint family has been left out from hotchpot; (b) Properties alienated before filing of the suit have been included in the suit schedule; and (c) Some of the plots included in the suit schedule have been exclusively settled in the names of the defendants. 3. Plaintiff filed a petition under Order 11 Rule 1, C.P.C. calling upon the defendants to answer the interrogatories on the ground that the averments in the written statement are vague. The three interrogatories which the plaintiff prayed to be served on the defendants are :--(i) 'What other joint family properties have been left out from the suit as stated by you in para 5 of your written statement and the detailed descriptions? (ii) Have ...
Tag this Judgment!Kulamani Pradhan and anr. Vs. Giridhari Mohanty and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Dec-21-1990
Reported in: 1991(I)OLR209
P.C. Misra, J.1. This revision is directed against an order passed by the Munsif, Kendrapara in Title Suit No. 57 of 1984 in which it was held that document in question which purports to be a deed acknowledging an adoption in favour of the plaintiff is not required to be impounded as it is not chargeable to stamp duty.2. Defendants 4 and 5 in the aforesaid suit are th,e petitioners in this revision. Opp. party No. 1 as the plaintiff filed the aforesaid suit praying for a decree of permanent injunction restraining the defendants from coming upon and interfering with the possession of the plaintiff in respect of Schedule 'Kha' lands and for other consequential reliefs, The plaintiff claims to be an adopted son of one Bairagi Mohanty, 'who has executed the sale deed long after the adoption. It was necessitated as he., (plaintiff's) would be father-in-Law was reluctant to give his daughter in marriage with the plaintiff who had no document in proof of his status as an adopted son. The plai...
Tag this Judgment!Rostam Khan Vs. Commissioner of Endowments and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Dec-21-1990
Reported in: 1991(I)OLR297
P.C. Misra, J.1. The petitioner in this writ application has prayed for quashing the proceeding Under Section 68 of the Orissa Hindu Religious Endowments Act (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') started against him and also the revisions! order of the Commissioner of Endowments confirming the order of the Assistant Commissioner of Endowments in the matter of restitution of the properties of which the petitioner was dispossessed in the aforesaid proceeding.2. The present opp. party No. 3 as trustee and Executive Officer of the deity Sri Laxmibarahnath Jew at Demal within the jurisdiction of Munsif, Kendrapara- in the district of Cuttack filed' an application Under Section 68 of the Act, registered as O. A. No. 11 of 1%8. In the said proceeding the present petitioner was set ex parte and on the basis of the ex parte evidence, an ex parte order putting the opp. party No. 3 in charge was passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Endowments. Pursuant to the said order, a writ was issued to ...
Tag this Judgment!Tilotama Bewa Vs. Tirtha Dehuri and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Dec-20-1990
Reported in: 1991(I)OLR214
A.K. Padhi, J.1. Plaintiff is the appellant. Appeal arises out of a suit for partition. The admitted relationship as per the genealogy is as follows : Brusabha - W. Nirasa Bewa (D. 2) | ____________________________|_____________________________ | | | | Aditya (died) Tirtha (son) Mathura (son) Uttama (daughter) in 1980) (D. 1) (D. 3) died (D. 4) = Tilotama on 25-4-1982During pendency of the suit defendant No. 2 died. On 25-4-1982 defendant No. 3 died leaving behind her husband, sons and a daughter as her legal representatives. The advocate for the defendants filed a memo intimating the Court regarding the death of defendant No. 3. In spite of the intimation by the advocate for the defendant No. 3, the plaintiff did not take any step for substitution in time. An application for substitution was filed without being supported by an affidavit. Only on 16-11-1982 after the abatement had set in, applications for substitution, to set aside the abatement along with an application Under Section ...
Tag this Judgment!The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Sri Harbanslal Agrawal
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Dec-19-1990
Reported in: AIR1991Ori187
D.P. Mohapatra, J.1. The question that falls for determination in this appeal relates to award of interest by the Arbitrator. Indeed Shri S. S. Das, learned counsel for the appellant, stated at the commencement of his argument that his challenge to the award is confined to the direction for payment of interest only.2. The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. ('Insurance Company' for short) filed this appeal under Section 39 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 assailing the judgment of the Subordinate Judge, Rourkela in Title Suit No. 36 of 1988 by which he confirmed the award passed by the Arbitrator and made it a rule of the court overruling the objection raised by the appellant. The facts relevant for proper appreciation of the case may be stated thus:The car bearing registration No. OAO 1213 belonging to the claimant-respondent was insured with the appellant-Company under policy No. 4323609798 vide certificate No. 543488 dated 29-1-82. It was involved in an accident on 13-4-82. Certain dispute hav...
Tag this Judgment!Indian Metals and Ferro Alloys Ltd. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Dec-19-1990
Reported in: [1992]195ITR539(Orissa)
A. Pasayat, J.1. The non-recommendation of a statutory body, specified authority under Section 72A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short the 'Act'), and the Central Government's decision based on it, refusing certain benefits flowing from the aforesaid statutory provision, are challenged in this writ application. A minor challenge to the vires of a particular provision in the guidelines dated February 23, 1981, issued by the Central Government on the ground of unreasonableness has been made. We shall advert to the statutory provisions which have a relevance, but a brief resume of the factual position is necessary to be given.2. There was a limited company named Kalinga Tubes Limited which was engaged in the manufacture of steel tubes, pipes and poles which was not financially sound and viable, and its total accumulated loss as on December 31, 1978 was more than Rs. 6 crores. The petitioner's business activities, inter alia, included manufacture of ferro alloys. With the object of reviv...
Tag this Judgment!Shyama Charan Pradhan and ors. Vs. Naikhani Thakurani and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Dec-17-1990
Reported in: AIR1991Ori221; 71(1991)CLT339; 1991(I)OLR181
ORDERA.K. Padhi, J. 1. Villagers of Fullabani are the appellants. Respondent No. 1 is the deity Naikhani Thakurani and respondents 2 to 5 claimed to be hereditary trustees of the deity. Respondents 2 to 5 filed an application under Section 41 of the Orissa Hindu Religious Endowment Act, 1951 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') for declaration that they are the hereditary trustees of the deity. The public character of the deity is not disputed. In the claim petition it is averred that the deity was an ancient one and had self-revealed. One Sukadeb Panda, common ancestor of the applicants was appointed as hereditary Marfatdar-cum-Archak of the deity and after him his successors had been hereditary trustees in management of properties of the deity and also are rendering Sevapuja. Neither the villagers nor anybody else were ever in management of the affairs of the deity and thus constitution of a board of non-hereditary trustees was unwarranted. 2. The appellants, residents of the villa...
Tag this Judgment!Sri Jagar Singh Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Dec-17-1990
Reported in: 71(1991)CLT434; 1991(I)OLR335
A.K. Padhi, J.1. Plaintiff is the petitioner Challenging the judgment and decree dated 7-2 195 and l5-2-1?85 respectively in Money appeal No. 3 of 1982 reversing the judgment and decree dated 16 -11-1982 and 23--10-1982 respectively passed in Money Suit No. 13 of 1981, this Civil Revision has been filed.2. In the plaint, it has been averred that the plaintiff 'was appointed to the Indian Administrative Service in the year 1976 and was allotted to the Orissa Cadre. After completion of probation' period he was posted as SDO, Bhanjnagar on 22-2-1978 and thereafter posted as Charge Officer of Sambalpuf Majo. Settlement in which post he can inued till 25-7- 1980. these two posts, according to him carries a basic pay of Rs. 800/. The plaintiff-petitioner's pay is to be fixed under the provisions of 'the Indian 'Administrative Service (Pay)' Rules, 1954 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Rules'). According to the petitioner, since his appointment was in accordance- with Rule 9(4) of the Rules, ...
Tag this Judgment!A. Karmaraju Patro Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Dec-15-1990
Reported in: 1991CriLJ2009; 1991(I)OLR154
J.M. Mahapatra, J.1. The revision is directed against the judgment and order dated 3-4-1982 of the learned Sessions judge, Ganjam, Berharnpur maintaining the conviction of the petitioner under Set. 376,1. P. C. and sentencing him to R. L for five years thereunder.2. Prosecution case in a nut-shell is that in the evening of 3-8-1979 the petitioner along with some others of village Budhamba was going with a woman by name Mathamani Jani towards Dera burial ground. One Ladu Kishore Pradhan saw it and waited on the road to see .what they were doing. About half an hour after he found all those persons including the petitioner running away. He went to nearby liquor shop and found some persons and told them as to what he had seen. Then all of them went to the spot and found the prosecutrix Mathamani Jani (P. W. 3) lying there almost naked. To their query she told them that one healthy boy of Dera community of Kodala and one boy of Kharada community and three others, whom she could identify rob...
Tag this Judgment!Umakanta Mahanta Vs. the State
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Dec-14-1990
Reported in: 1991CriLJ2024
J.M. Mahapatra, J.1. The appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 1-12-1986 of the learned Sessions Judge, Mayurbhanj convicting the appellant under Sections 302, IPC and 25(a) of the Arms Act and sentencing him respectively to imprisonment for life and R.I. for six months, the sentences being directed to run concurrently.2. Prosecution case briefly stated, is that the parties belonged to village Kendumundi under Jharapokharia P. S., district Mayurbhanj. The incident took place around 9 O'Clock in the night of 23-3-1985. The deceased Surendra along with Girish (P.W.9), Sachindra (P.W.2) and Bira (P. W. 3) had been to answer the call of nature to a pond in the Bari of P.W. 9. After easing P.Ws. 2 and 3 left the place while P.W. 9 and the deceased stayed back and were washing themselves after easing. At that time two persons came near the bank of the pond seeing whom the deceased stood up and flashed the torch he was carrying and at that time the person standing behind the...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »