Orissa Court October 1991 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.
Durga Thakurani and ors. Vs. Balunki Bhoi and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Oct-29-1991
Reported in: 1992(I)OLR161
G.B. Pattnaik, J. 1. The petitioners have assailed the order of the Member, Board of Revenue dated 27th July. 1931, in G.L.S. Case No. 93 of 1979, annexed as Annexure-8, which the Board has passed in purported exercise of power under Section7-A of the Orissa Government Land Settlement Act as well as the order of the said Member, Board of Revenue, under Annexure-9 rejecting the application for review filed by the petitioners.2. The petitioners assert that the ex-intermediary had executed a lease in their favour on 5-9-1941 and subsequent to the vesting the intermediary submitted an Ekpadia and the State also accepted rent from the petitioners. In 1973, the Sub-Divisional Officer had initiated a proceeding under Section 5 (i) of the Orissa Estates Abolition Act, but on a finding that the lease in question was prior to the appointed date and the same was genuine, dropped the proceeding. The said order of the Sub-Divisional Officer has been annexed as Annexure-5. In the year 1975, the cont...
Sri Sambhu Panigrahi Vs. Sri Parsuram Panda
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Oct-28-1991
Reported in: AIR1992Ori115; 73(1992)CLT387
D.P. Mohapatra, J. 1. Shri Sambhu Panigrahi, who filed his nomination to contest for election to the State Legislative Assembly from 72-Chatrapur constituency held in 1990, filed this application under Ss.80A, 81, 84, 87, 98, 99, 100 read with Ss. 30, 33, 36 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 (for short the 'Act') and Art. 173(a) of the Constitution of India, 1950 with the prayers, inter alia, to declare that rejection of his nomination paper by the Returning Officer, Chatrapur as illegal and improper and thereby the election of the respondent Shri Parsuram Panda from the said constituency was materially affected and to declare the election of the respondent as void and set aside the same. 2. The case pleaded by the petitioner in his petition shortly stated is that the last date for filing nominations for election to the aforementioned constituency was fixed to 4-2-1990 and 5-2-1990 was the date for scrutiny of nominations. On 2-2-1990 the petitioner deposited Rs. 250/- towa...
Kanchan Dakuani Vs. Tarini Dakuani
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Oct-28-1991
Reported in: AIR1992Ori159; 1992(I)OLR287
R.C. Patnaik, J. 1. Defendant No. 2 is the appellant in this Second Appeal against the judgment dated 8-12-1980 rendered by the learned Subordinate Judge, Aska, in Title Appeal No. 27 of 1977 reversing the decision dated 6-9-1977 passed by the learned Munsif, Aska, in Title Suit No. 162 of 1975. 2. The plaintiff and defendant No. 2 are the dauthers of original defendant No. 1 Rahasa Dakuani, who was the widow of Khali Dakua who died in 1953. Rahasa, after the death of her husband, executed two deeds of settlement. Ext. 3 dated 23-3-1953 is the deed of settlement executed by her in favour of the plaintiff and her husband. On 30-5-1975, Rahasa (original defendant No. 1) made a fresh settlement Ext. A in favour ofdefendant No. 2 in respect of the property covered under Ext. 1. The plaintiff instituted a suit for declaring Ext. A invalid and for other consequential reliefs. Defendant No. 1, the mother admitted execution of Ext. 1 and Ext. A. She made a fresh settlement in favour of defenda...
Somanath Mishra Vs. Madhu Sudan Mati and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Oct-28-1991
Reported in: 73(1992)CLT381; 1992(I)OLR290
R.C. Patnaik, J.1. This Second Appeal by defendant is directed against the decision dated 14-1-1980 passed by the appellate Court in Title Appeal No. 69/31/17 of 1979/77/75 dismissing the plaintiffs suit reversing the decision of the trial Court in O. S. No. 141 of 1972-I.2. The plaintiffs, who are brothers, instituted the suit for redemption alleging that the property in suit 419 decimals in extent appertaining to Plot No. 376 in Khata No 166 of mouza Krushnanagar in the district of Puri belonged to one Kasinath Naik and had been mortgaged by him with the defendant on 7-5-1955. Prior to redemption, Kasinath sold the property to them for a consideration of Rs. 200/- by a registered sale deed dated 23-9-1956 and put them in possession. While they were in enjoyment of the property, the defendant pursuant to his purchase in an auction held in the execution of a decree passed in O. S. No. 94/61 sought recovery of possession from them on 3-11-1972 and put them to notice that the suit for fo...
Trilochan Naik and ors. Vs. Sukuru Sethi and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Oct-28-1991
Reported in: 1992(I)OLR296
R.C. Patnaik, J.1. The short question that arises in this revision from an order passed by the learned Munsif, Sonepur, holding that the suit was not maintainable having regard to the provision contained in Section 51 of the Orissa Consolidation of Holdings and Prevention of Fragmentation of Land Act, 1972, is if having regard to the nature of the suit, the relief sought, Section 51 of the Consolidation Act would operate as a bar to the maintainability of the suit.2. One Sankirtan, the common ancestor, died leaving behind three sons, Judhistira, Nila and Gokul, was died in a state of jointness. The plaintiffs and defendants 1 and 6 are the descendants. For convenience, as the parties did not pull on well, the properties were enjoyed in separate parcels and separate notes of possession were entered in the record-of-rights prepared in the 4th settlement. Some lands were also recorded as joint Khata No. 51 of the 4th settlement was acquired by Gokula out of the joint family nucleus. He wa...
State Vs. Jagat Mohan Padhi
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Oct-28-1991
Reported in: 1992CriLJ2151
D.P. Mohapatra, J.1. The State has filed this appeal Under Section 378(1), Criminal Procedure Code assailing the appellate judgment of the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Ganjam in appeal acquitting the respondent of the charge Under Section 13(1) of the Rice Milling Industries (Regulation) Act, 1958 (hereinafter, referred to as the 'Act'). The learned Sub-divisional Judicial Magistrate, Chatrapur (S.D.J.M.) had convicted him of the said offence and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months.2. The gist of the prosecution case is that on 31-3-77 at about 5-30 p.m. when the Inspector of Supplies, Purusottampur (P.W. 4), other supply officials and the Executive Magistrate (P.W. 1) visited the rice mill of the respondent they found the mill premises to be locked up and the respondent Jagat Mohan Padhi present on the premises. On being asked by the Supply Inspector to open the door of the mill he refused. From the stock of paddy and rice kept inside the mill premises the...
State Prevention and Control of Pollution Board Vs. Berhampur Municipa ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Oct-28-1991
Reported in: 1992CriLJ2909
ORDERD.P. Mohapatra, J.1. The State Prevention and Control of Pollution Board, an authority constituted under the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 (Act 6 of 1974) filed this revision petition Under Section 401 of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cr. P.C.) assailing the order dated 28-9-89 of the Sub-divisional Judicial Magistrate, Berhampur in 2(c) CC No. 162 of 1989 directing it to file the required sanction to proceed against the Berhampur Municipality, Berhampur, opposite party No. 1 and its Executive Officer, opposite party No. 2. 2. The facts relevant for the present purpose may be shortly stated thus:The petitioner-Board through its Junior Law Officer, Sri Narendra Kumar Khuntia filed the complaint alleging, inter alia, that the opposite parties committed the offence punishable Under Section 44 of the Act for controvention of Sections 25 and 26 thereof. It was alleged in the complaint petition that the opposite parties were discharging its sewage effluent on the ...
Rajendra Prasad Bose Vs. Late J.R. Bose Represented by His Legal Repre ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Oct-13-1991
Reported in: 1992(II)OLR22
R.C. Patnaik, J.1. This is a revision Under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure by the decree-holder against an order dated 24-9-T987 passed by the learned Subordinate Judge, Cuttack, in Execution Case No. 52 of 1987 dropping the Execution Case holding the same as not maintainable and directing the decree-holder to take certificate of non-satisfaction of the decree to the Court of Subordinate Judge, Balasore, within whose jurisdiction the property is situate, for execution of the decree.2. A preliminary decree for partition of property located in the districts of Cuttack, Puri and Balasore was passed on 19-2-1955 by the Subordinate Judge, Cuttack, in Title Suit No. 64 of 1949. Pursuant to a partial final decree passed on 27-8-1963 in respect of the residential houses at Cuttack and Puri possession was taken in Execution Case No. 10 of 1963. Another partial final decree for mesne profits was passed on 11-7-1973 and in Execution Case No. 80 of 1984 properties located in the distri...
Indian Charge Chrome Limited Vs. Asea Stal Ab and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Oct-11-1991
Reported in: 1991(II)OLR537
S.C. Mohapatra, J.1. This is an appeal by the plaintiff under Order 43 Rule 1-(r) CPC against an order refusing to grant temporary injunction as prayed for by the plaintiff by vacating ad interim order of injunction granted by the trial Court.2. Plaintiff is a company which has been registered to carry on the business of production and supply of Charge Chrome. Electrical energy is necessary for such production Therefore, it entered into agreement with defendant Nos. 1 to 3 a consortium of Foreign Organisation to set up a captive power plant of 108 M W capacity for generating 700 million units of energy in the minimum annually. Defendant No. 4 a foreign banker for self and agent of defendant Nos. 5 to 11 Other foreign bankers agreed to finance the setting up of captive power plant. Defendant No. 12 gave guarantee to defendant No. 4 on behalf of plaintiff for payment of the loan amount to plaintiff. Defendant No 13 gave guarentee to defendant No. 12 on behalf of plaintiff for payment of ...
Sk. Sakaout and ors. Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Oct-11-1991
Reported in: 1992(I)OLR89
R.C. Patnaik, J. 1. This is an application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure by the three petitioners for the quashing of the cognisance taken by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Balasore, under Section 18 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.2. Hasina Bibi, petitioner No. 3, is the owner of a mini-truck. Petitioner No. 1 is her husband and Sk. Kutub, petitioner No. 2, is the driver. 66 gunnybags each containing 35 Kgs. of poppy powder were recovered from the vehicle. Though the petitioners were originally released by the arresting authority on 8-11-1987 and continued on bail for sometime, cognisance was taken under Section 18 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act(for short, 'the NDPS Act' on 20-2-1991 and the case was committed to the Court of Session for trial. The petitioners have challenged the cognisance taken under Section 18 of the Act on the ground that the officers conducting the investigation and arresting ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »