Orissa Court May 1991 Judgments
Hitesh Kumar Ojha and anr. Vs. Krushna Chandra Mahapatra
Court: Orissa
Decided on: May-17-1991
Reported in: AIR1992Ori91
A. Pasayat, J.1. The appellants call in question the correctness of the order passed by the learned Subordinate Judge, First Court, Cuttack rejecting a petition filed under Order 9, Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (in short the 'Code'), praying to set aside an ex parte decree passed in T.S. No. 308 of 1984.2. The background facts are that the respondent as plaintiff filed the aforesaid suit for a specific performance of contract. According to the appellants summons were suppressed and consequently, they had no knowledge about the filing of the suit and the suit was decided ex parte. The appellants filed a petition under Order 9, Rule 13 of the Code for setting aside the ex parte decree and for hearing the suit on merits. The same has been dismissed, on the ground that service of summons has been duly proved and therefore, the appellants having not appeared in spite of valid service of summons, there was nothingillicit in the ex parte decree. In the present appeal, it has b...
Tag this Judgment!Laxmi Priya Rout Vs. Kama Prasad Rout
Court: Orissa
Decided on: May-17-1991
Reported in: AIR1992Ori88
ORDERD.P. Mohapatra, J.1. The core question that arises for determination in this case is whether the Court has jurisdiction to revise its order granting interim maintenance and expenses of the proceeding to the wife during pendency of a proceeding under the Hindu Marriage Act (for short, 'the Act'). The answer to the question depends on interpretation of the provision in Section 24 of the Act.2. The facts of the case relevant for the present proceeding may be stated thus :On the petition filed by the opposite party for divorce against the petitioner O. S, No. 139 of 1984 has been registered; it is pending in the Court of the Subordinate Judge, Kendrapara. On the application filed by the petitioner for herself and for her minor son the learned Subordinate Judge by order dated 20-11-87 in Misc. Case No, 88 of 1985 directed the opposite party to pay Rs. 250/-per month towards interim maintenance and Rs. 100/- towards expenses of the proceeding. There was considerable delay on the part of...
Tag this Judgment!Purusottam Sabara and ors. Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: May-17-1991
Reported in: 1992CriLJ1417; 1991(II)OLR94
S.K. Mohanty, J.1. A question of considerable general importance namely : Does the failure of the Magistrate to explain to the accused the particulars of the offence as required by Section 251 of the Code of Criminal Procedure vitiate the trial and the consequent conviction is one of the questions that has arisen in these revisions for an answer. The other question is if conviction can be founded on admission of guilt of the accused despite the fact that the prosecution report does not make out an offence Under Section 47 (f) of the Bihar and Orissa Excise Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act').2. In course of a raid by the striking Force of the Excise staff, certain quantities of fermented Mahua wash was recovered from the houses of the petitioners. They also recovered some distilling apparatus from the houses of the petittoners in Criminal Revision Nos. 181 and 186 of 1967. They faced the trial for commission of offence Under Section 47(f) of the Act. On 28-9-1984, they were prod...
Tag this Judgment!Rabindranath Sahu Vs. Dayanidhi Sahu and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: May-17-1991
Reported in: 1992CriLJ876; 1991(II)OLR71
S.K. Mohanty, J.1. First party in a proceeding Under Section 145, Cr.P.C. is in revision against order dated September 25, 1987 passed by the Executive Magistrate, Nayagarh, accepting the submission of the second party and dropping the proceeding midway, as not maintainable.2. The case land measures 9 decimals which admittedly belonged to Bharat Sahu. Claiming to have entered into possession of the same by virtue of purchase under a registered sale deed dated July 3,1985, the second party initiated a proceeding Under Section 144, Cr.P.C. against the first party which was decided in favour of the former on December 21, 1985 making the restraint order against the tatter absolute. Thereafter on May 30, 1986 the first party initiated the impugned proceeding Under Section 145 of the Code against the second party concerning the above land. After being satisfied that there was apprehension of breach of peace concerning, the disputed land, the learned Executive Magistrate noticed both the part...
Tag this Judgment!Pravakar Patra Vs. Certificate Officer and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: May-17-1991
Reported in: 1991(II)OLR367
S.C. Mohapatra, J.1. This is an application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for Issue of a writ in nature of certiorary or any other appropriate writ quashing Annexure-4 calling upon petitioner to deposit Rs, 3,328/- towards dues in a proceeding under the Orissa Public Demands Recovery Act, 1963 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act').2. Case of petitioner is that his father who expired on 11-5-1981 was owner of a motor vehicle. Regional Transport Officer, Bolangir, as certificate holder sent a requisition to Certificate Officer, Patnagarh for realisation of Rs. 2,651/- from the petitioner towards tax for the period between July, 19?5 and March, 1988 in respect of the said -vehicle ORR 437. On that basis Certificate Officer signed a certificate under the Act making the petitioner certificate debtor. On receipt of notice petitioner filed his petition denying liability' Under Section 8 of the Act. During pendency of his petition. Certificate Officer has issued Annexure-4.3....
Tag this Judgment!Arjun Panda and ors. Vs. Surendra Prasad Misra and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: May-17-1991
Reported in: 1991(II)OLR416
D.M. Patnaik, J.1. This is a petition under Arts. 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India invoking the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court for quashing the confirming order dated 7-3-1984 of the Commissioner of Consolidations, Orissa, In Con Revision Case No. 159 of 1984 and for issue of appropriate direction for declaring the right, title and interest and granting other consequential benefits over the land in dispute in favour of the petitioners.2. Facts In brief.The disputed land measures Ac. 6. 41 decimals under Sabik plot Nos. 167, 168 and 207 under. Khata No. 28 of village Haripur Paitarl within the Aska Tahasil in the district of Ganjam. This land, according to the petitioners originally stood recorded in the name of one Krishna Bhatta, the then Inamdar. After his death, his son Bhagirathi Bhatta enjoyed the property as the Inamdar.It is claimed that in the year 1939 Basudeba Pande, father of the writ petitioners was inducted as Bhag Chasi by Bhagirathi Bhatta, the Inamdar....
Tag this Judgment!Udayanath Pani Vs. Basanti Dalai and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: May-17-1991
Reported in: 1(1992)ACC578
A. Pasayat, J.1. The owner of a vehicle which was involved in an accident has called in question the legality of the direction given by the Second Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Cuttack (in short the 'Tribunal'). Fastening a part of the compensation awarded on him. The award was made on the basis of a Claim petition filed by the dependents (hereinafter referred to as the 'claimants') of one Jayakrushna Dalai alias Jayaram Dalai who lost his life on 20.2.1984 in an accident wherein a bus bearing registration No. ORU 7248 belonging to the appellant was involved.2. The background facts and the grounds of challenge as described by the claimants are as follows:On the fateful date at about noon while the deceased was standing by the side of Jagatsinghpur-Cuttack road at Kaijanga bus stop, the offending vehicle dashed against him, knocked him down and ran over him resulting in his instantaneous death. The vehicle was being driven in a rash and negligent manner, the deceased at the time of d...
Tag this Judgment!State Transport Authority, Orissa Vs. Presiding Officer, State Transpo ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: May-16-1991
Reported in: AIR1992Ori13
R.C. Patnaik, J.1. An identicalquestion is involved in these two writ applications -- one filed by the petitioner seeking a permit and the other by the State Transport Authority -- they are taken up together and are disposed of by this judgment.The petitioner in O.J.C. No. 2614/91 applied for a temporary permit for the route Gania -- Cuttack in respect of his vehicle bearing registration number OSK 1805. The same was rejected by the Transport Commissioner-cum-Chairman, State Transport Authority by order dated 5-2-91, as per Annexure-4, which reads as follows:'When there is arrear outstanding against this vehicle, we shall not issue any permit even if there is stay order in the appeal case. The stay order stops the Taxing authority from collecting the tax dues. But the authority issuing permit must take into account the tax payment conduct of the operator. As his tax payment conduct is found to be not good, we shall not issue permit.'The petitioner aggrieved by the said order as per Ann...
Tag this Judgment!Executive Engineer, Electrical Division Vs. Commissioner for Workmen's ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: May-16-1991
Reported in: 1992ACJ633; (1992)IILLJ807Ori; 1992(II)OLR489
A. Pasayat, J.1. The challenge in this appeal is to legality of the order passed by the Commissioner under Workmen's Compensation-cum-Asst. Labour Commissioner, Balasore (in short the 'Commissioner'), by which an award of Rs. 10,080/-was made in favour of the respondent No. 22. The background facts are that an application was filed by the respondent No. 2 (described hereinafter as the 'workman') on January 10, 1985 alleging that he sustained injuries on February 2, 1975 while performing duties under the present appellant (described hereinafter as the 'employer'). He claimed compensation of Rs. 30,000/- alleging that at the relevant time he was in the wage group of Rs. 300/- to Rs. 400/-and due to the accident he sustained injuries and lost his right hand. The employer in its return accepted that there was an accident, but took the plea that the workman sustained injuries while doing a work which exceeded the work schedule allotted to him, and therfore it was not liable for any payment....
Tag this Judgment!Executive Engineer, Balassore Electrical Division Vs. Commissioner For ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: May-16-1991
Reported in: I(1993)ACC191
A. Pasayat, J.1. The challenge in this appeal is to legality of the order passed by the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation-cum-Assistant. Labour Commissioner, Balasore (in short the 'Commissioner'), by which an award of Rs.10,080/- was made in favour of the respondent No. 2.2. The background facts are that an application was filed by the respondent No.2 (described hereinafter as the 'workman') on 10.1.1985 alleging that he sustained injuries on 2.2.1975 while performing duties, under the present appellant (described hereinafter as 'the employer'). He claimed compensation of Rs.30,000/- alleging that at the relevant time he was in the wage group of Rs.300/- to Rs.400A and due to the accident he sustained injuries and lost his right hand. The employer in its return accepted that there was an accident, but took the plea that the workman sustained injuries while doing a work which exceeded the work schedule allotted to him, and therefore it was not liable for any payment. The undisput...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »