Orissa Court July 1990 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.
Dattaram Jagannath and anr. Vs. Mahendra Singh Jaggi
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-05-1990
Reported in: AIR1991Ori74
ORDERS.C. Mohapatra, J.1. Refusal to adjust amount decreed in favour of petitioner in execution of decree for money by opposite party in grievance of petitioner in this Civil Revision.2. Petitioner filed a suit for money against opposite party where opposite party made a counter claim. On 16-3-1964, petitioner obtained a decree for Rs. 10,723/- with interest at the rate of 6% per annum and costs. In respect of claim of opposite party a preliminary decree for accounts was passed. Both parties preferred appeals. Appeal of opposite party against decree in favour of petitioner was dismissed on 29-2-1968. Appeal of petitioner against preliminary decree was allowed on 5-8-1970 and such decree was vacated. Opposite party did not challenge dismissal of his appeal and thus, decree against him for Rs. 10,723/- with interest at 6% per annum and costs became final. He, however, assailed appellate decree vacating the preliminary decree for accounts and Supreme Court reversed the appellate decree an...
Sahadev Nayak and After Him Gundicha Nayak Vs. State of Orissa and ors ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-05-1990
Reported in: AIR1990Ori235
Hansaria, C.J.1. The question for determination by this Bench is whether a person who had not filed his return under Section 40-A of the Orissa Land Reforms Act, 1960 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') could claim to have a right of option and choose the land to be retained by him after determination of the ceiling by the Revenue Officer in exercise of the power conferred on him by Section 42 read with Section 43 of the Act.2. The aforesaid question along with a contention of the petitioner that the finding relating to the quantum of ceiling surplus land as determined under the provisions of the Act was untenable came up for consideration before a Division Bench of this Court. The Bench did not accept the contention of the petitioner relating to the untenability of the quanutm of the ceilign surplus land inasmuch as it did not accept the stand of the petitioner that a separate ceiling ought to have been fixed for one Gundicha who was a son of the landholder. The other contention re...
Biswanath Dalabehera Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-05-1990
Reported in: 1990CriLJ2714
V. Gopalaswamy, J.1. This appeal is preferred against the judgment of the learned Special Judge (Vigilance), Sambalpur, convicting the accused-appellant under Section 5(1)(d) read with Section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and sentencing him thereunder to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/-, in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months and further convicting him under Section 5(1)(c) read with Section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act without imposing any separate sentence thereunder.2. The prosecution case may be briefly stated as follows: Accused was the Forester of Mahulpali Section within Bamra Forest Division of Sambalpur district during the period from 1972 to 1977. On 22-6-1976 he went to village Balimal where P.Ws. 1 and 2, who are brothers, were constructing separate buildings and accused them of having committed theft of logs from the forest. As the accused demanded Rs. 400/-from P.W. 1 and Rs. 200/ - fro...
Taicher Coal Mines Employees' Union Vs. Taicher Colliery and Ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-04-1990
Reported in: (1994)IIILLJ747Ori
Hansaria, C.J. 1. Penal deduction of wages for a period of 8 days from certain category of employees of Talcher Colliery with the aid of the proviso to Section 9(2) of the Payment of Wages Act, 1936 (shortly stated, the Act), has been assailed in this application under Article 226 of the Constitution principally on two grounds, viz.: (i) the deduction was in violation of the principles of natural justice; and (ii) there being no prior determination as to whether the concerted absence was without reasonable cause, no deduction at all could be made. 2. To appreciate these submissions advanced by Shri Palit, the broad facts of the case may be noted. These are: The loaders of the Talcher Colliery were discharging their duties earlier from 7 A.M. to 3 P.M. which was called 'day shift.' Likewise, there were evening and night shifts from 3 P.M. to 11 P.M. and from 11 P.M to 7 A.M. of the next day. These hours were shifted on and from 23 April 1984, to 8 A.M. to 4 P.M., 4 P.M. to 12 P.M. and ...
P. Dasarathi and ors. Vs. State
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-04-1990
Reported in: 1991CriLJ2985
L. Rath, J.1. The appellants stood trial under Section 302, I.P.C. while five other accused who have since been acquitted faced trial under Section 114 read with Section 302, IPC. The appellants having been convicted under Section 302, IPC and sentenced to imprisonment for life have approached this Court in appeal.2. The prosecution case is that the deceased P. Haribandhu was coming to his house after taking bath and while he was near the Khala of appellant No. 1, all the accused except one who were inside that Khala armed with deadly weapons like Khandakati and Kati surrounded the deceased. Appellant No. 1 who was armed with a Khandakati hit the deceased on his head and thereafter appellant No. 3 struck a Kati blow on his right leg on account of which the deceased fell down and thereafter appellant No. 2 gave a Kati blow on his left leg. While the deceased was still alive, appellant No. 1 gave a Khandakati blow on his neck as a result of which his wind pipe was severed and death was i...
Lakhana Nayak and anr. Vs. Basudev Swamy and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-03-1990
Reported in: AIR1991Ori33
ORDERG.B. Patnaik, J.1. Defendants 1 and 2 in a suit for partition are the appellants.2. Plaintiff alleged that when the temple for the Deity was constructed sometimes in 1962, the raiyats of the village were required to render help for the purpose of seva puja and bhog of the Deity. The villagers agreed to give Schedule-A lands for the purpose. A trust deed was created and possession of lands was surrendered and plaintiff being the President of the trust remained in possession of the lands and the usufructs of the lands were being utilized for the purpose of seva puja. The villagers were earlier managing the affairs of these Koth lands through a committee selected by them and the committee had the authority to make alienations in case of necessity. The said committee alienated 66 cents out of plot No. 568 to Magata Nahak and said Magata Nahak had been in possession of the same. The villagers also had alienated some lands to village schools as mentioned in Schedule-C and had set apart ...
State of Orissa Vs. Parsuram Panigrahi and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-03-1990
Reported in: 1990CriLJ2777
V. Gopalaswamy, J.1. The prosecution case, which has given rise to the above referred two appeals, may be briefly stated as follows : Deceased Biswambar Panda was a resident of village Badasingha within Binjharpur P. S. in Cuttack district. On 4-9-1978 at about 6 p.m. while the deceased was returning home on a bicycle, on the way, near Jenasahi Chhak of village Sainkul, all the thirty-eight accused persons including Rabi Nayak and Chaitan Jena, armed with deadly weapons attacked the deceased and assaulted him on different parts of his body as a result of which he sustained severe bleeding injuries all over his body and fell down unconscious. After thus assaulting the deceased, all the accused persons fled away from the place. On seeing the assault on the deceased, P.Ws. 1, 2 and 3 rushed to the spot of occurrence and found the deceased lying unconscious at the spot with multiple bleeding injuries on his person. Then P. W. 1 and others carried the deceased to Binjharpur P. H. C. for his...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›