Orissa Court April 1990 Judgments
Sibanarayan Singh Deo Vs. State of Orissa and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Apr-18-1990
Reported in: AIR1991Ori116
S.B. Patnaik, J. 1. The determination of ceiling in a ceiling surplus proceeding initiated suo motu by the Revenue Officer and confirmed by the appellate authority and further confirmed by the revisional authority is being assailed in this writ application.2. Before the Revenue Officer the surplus holder raised objection on the ground that lands which are admittedly waterlogged cannot be consisered to be a Class I land. It was further objected to on the ground that the transfer made after 26-9-1970 in respect of 7.17 acres should not be taken into consideration as the transfer was really one in earlier point of time though the execution of deed was made after 26-9-1970. The landholder also objected to the draft statement on the ground that he may be allowed to exercise his option to select the land to be retained by him. The Revenue Officer rejected all these objections. The petitioner filed an appeal. The appellate authority also considered the findings of the Revenue Officer and reje...
Tag this Judgment!Chandramani Sahu and ors. Vs. State of Orissa and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Apr-18-1990
Reported in: AIR1991Ori205
Pasayat, J.1. Petitioners, twenty-one in number, have filed this writ application assailing the action taken by the State of Orissa and its functionaries in issuing notifications under Sections 4, 17 and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act').2. The factual position shorn of unnecessary details is as follows :A notification dated 3-2-1981 was published in the Orissa Gazette Extraordinary on 11-3-1981 notifying intention of the State to acquire 25.904 acres of land for construction of Industrial Estate at village Panakalapalli near Berhampur in the district of Ganjam. On the same day a notification was issued under purported exercise of powers under Section. 17(4) of the Act notifying dispensation of the procedure laid down under Section 5A of the Act, by resort to the emergency powers conferred under the said provision. Subsequently a declaration under Section 6 was made to the effect that the land was required for public purpose. The said notificati...
Tag this Judgment!Madan Mohan Samantray Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Apr-17-1990
Reported in: [1991]188ITR306(Orissa)
G.B. Patnaik J.1. The plaintiff is the appellant against the judgment and decree of the Subordinate Judge, Bhubaneswar, dismissing the plaintiff's suit on a finding that the suit is not maintainable.2. The plaintiff alleged that the plaintiff had purchased the disputed property from one Ushamani Mahapatra and, thereafter, constructed a building on the said land with his own money. On November 16, 1973, he had executed a sale deed in favour of defendant No. 3 who is his daughter, but the said document was a sham one and was never intended to be acted upon. According to the plaintiff, no title in respect of the disputed property had passed on to defendant No. 3 on the basis of the sale deed dated November 16, 1973, and there had been no transfer of ownership, but defendant No. 2 initiated a proceeding under Chapter XXA of the Income-tax Act against defendant No. 3. The plaintiff also appeared in the said proceeding and submitted before defendant No. 2 that the proceeding was not main tai...
Tag this Judgment!Chetti Balakrishnamma Alias Balakrishna Vs. Chetti Chandrasekhar Rao a ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Apr-13-1990
Reported in: AIR1991Ori332
G.B. Patnaik, J. 1. Defendant No. 6 is the appellant. The plaintiff filed the suit for partition of the plaint schedule property claiming on the basis of a registered will executed by his grandfather Chetti Venkataswamy in 1953 (Ext. 43). 2. One Sarathi had two sons, Venkataswamy and Narasimhulu. Venkataswamy died on 5-5-1957 leaving his widow Ammayamma and two sons Krishnamurty and Balakrishna (defendants 4 and 6 respectively) and daugher Sundaramma (defendant No. 8). Krishnamurty's wife is Anusuya (defendant No. 5) and Balakrishna's son is Jagannadha (defendant No. 7). Krishnamurty's sonChandrasekhar is the plaintiff and the three daughters Suguna, Geeta and Vanaja are defendants 1, 2 and 3 respectively. Narasimhulu died on 24-4-1952 leaving three wives, Narasamma, Sundaramma and Manikyamma who were issueless. According to the plaintiffs case, Venkataswamy and Narasimhulu had a business of selling country cigar and out of the money thus earned lots of properties were acquired. After ...
Tag this Judgment!Kelucharan Das Vs. Orissa State Electricity Board and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Apr-13-1990
Reported in: 70(1990)CLT447; (1992)ILLJ882Ori
G.B. Patnaik, J.1. The petitioner who was an employee under the Orissa State Electricity Board assails the order of superannuation on attaining 58th year, annexed as Annexure-5. The main grounds on which the petitioner assails the superannuation are:-(i) The Standing Orders having provided for conditions of service of an employee of the Board and not having provided for the age of superannuation, the petitioner could not have been retired on attainment of 58th year on the basis of the Regulations framed under Section 79(c) of the Electricity (Supply) Act, called the Orissa State Electricity Board Employees' Age of Retirement Regulations, 1979 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Retirement Regulations');(ii) The said Regulations not having been published in the Official Gazelle has no force in the eye of law;(iii) Under the Regulations, only employees described in Categories I, II and III of the Schedule are to superannuate on completion of 58 years and those in Category IV are to retire o...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Aratibala Mohanty Vs. State Bank of India and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Apr-06-1990
Reported in: AIR1991Ori260; 70(1990)CLT205
G.B. Patnaik, J. 1. A short but interesting question of law that arises for consideration in this writ application is whether the pawnee not being in a position to release the pledged articles for some supervening circumstances can charge interest on the amount in question for the period for which the said pawnee was not in a position to release the pledged articles.2. This question arises in the following circumstances: The petitioner pledged gold ornaments with the opposite party -- State Bank of India, Bhubaneswar, and took three different loans on three different dates by executing promissory notes. It was a stipulation in the promissory note that the loan would be repaid with interest in instalments within a specified period failing which the pawnee (the Bank) would be at liberty to dispose of the pledged articles by public auction. Between 3-12-1973 and 23-7-1974 by pledging 729.700 grammes of gold, the petitioner had taken a loan of Rs. 17,200/-. On 2-4-1976, the petitioner wrot...
Tag this Judgment!Akhaya Kumar Sahoo Vs. Chhabirani Seth and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Apr-06-1990
Reported in: I(1991)ACC309; 1991ACJ468; AIR1991Ori218; 71(1991)CLT176
Hansaria, C.J. 1. A sum of Rupees 70,000/- was claimed as compensation under Section 110-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (shortly, 'the Act'). Following the accident in which the claimant was injured by a bus while standing near her house, her left arm had to be amputated. When the accident occurred, the claimant was aged about 15 years and was prosecuting her studies in class X. She had thus a bright prospect in life but due to the accident her expectation even of marriage got belied and she became invalid for life. 2. The learned 2nd. Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Cuttack, on being satisfied about the justifiability of the amount as claimed awarded the same. Out of the awarded amount, a sum of Rs. 50,000/- was made liable to be paid by the insurer of the vehicle and as to the remaining amount, the owner was made liable. Feeling aggrieved, the owner has preferred this appeal. 3. When the appeal was heard by a learned single Judge of this Court, the question which was substantially...
Tag this Judgment!Mst. Sachi Sahoo Vs. Sri Ekadasia Sahoo
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Apr-06-1990
Reported in: II(1990)DMC462
S.C. Mohapatra, J. 1. Decree for judicial separation at the instance of the husband is the grievance of the wife in this appeal under Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act').2. On the finding that the wife had no just cause to desert the husband, trial Court has passed the decree for judicial separation although the husband prayed for divorce, restitution of conjugal right or judicial separation, as the case may be. Husband has been satisfied with the decree for judicial separation.3. For getting a decree for judicial separation by the husband on the ground of desertion by his wife, husband is to prove that (i) the wife is living separately for a period of two years continuously from before the date of presentation of the petition and (ii) such separate living is with the intention of abandonment of cohabitation of the parties to an end. Added to it, husband is to prove that he did not create any situation which became the cause of separate liv...
Tag this Judgment!Sushila Industries and ors. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Apr-05-1990
Reported in: 70(1990)CLT142; [1992]75CompCas704(Orissa); [1992]198ITR332(Orissa)
V. Gopalaswamy, J. 1. This revision is preferred for setting aside the order dated October 30, 1989, of the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Cuttack, Camp at Rourkela, in Case II(c) C. C. No. 17 of 1989, framing charges against the petitioners under Sections 277 and 278B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act').2. The firm, Sushila Industries (petitioner No. 1), is a registered firm of which petitioners Nos. 2 to 7 and the deceased, Mahabir Prasad Agarwala (who died on November 12, 1987), are the partners. The registered firm was situated at Rajgangpur within the revenue district of Sundargarh, Orissa, and it is an income-tax assessee. The Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax (Assessment), Special Range, Sambalpur (the present opposite party), filed the complaint Case II(c) C. C. No. 17 of 1989 against all the petitioners alleging that the assessee-firm (petitioner No. 1) for the assessment year 1976-77 has filed a return with false particulars and w...
Tag this Judgment!State of Orissa and Etc. Vs. Nrusingha Charan Barik
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Apr-05-1990
Reported in: 1990CriLJ1676
V. Gopalaswamy, J.1. The prosecution case giving rise to the above-mentioned three appeals may be briefly stated as follows:Accused Nrusingha Barik is a resident of village Ramakrishnapur and accused Kailash Barik is a resident of the neighbouring village Nahanga and both the villages are at a distance of about 3 kms. from village Dixitpada (within Salipur P.S. in Cuttack district) where deceased Swarnalata, an unmarried girl aged about 17 years, was residing with her mother. Accused Nrusingha is the deceased's father's sister' son. Swarnalata's father Golak Barik died about 10 years prior to the date of occurrence. Swarnalata's sister Pravabati (P.W. 22) was also residing in the same village Dixitpada with her husband Prafulla (P. W. 1). Accused Nrusingha used to frequently visit the houses of Swarnalata and Prafulla. About one year prior to the date of occurrence deceased Swarnalata was bitten by a dog and in spite of treatment at Kendrapara and; Cuttack, she was not completely cured...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »