Orissa Court May 1992 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.
Bishnu Prasad Bohidar and Vs. Chief General Manager, State Bank of Ind ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: May-15-1992
Reported in: (1993)ILLJ1081Ori; 1993(I)OLR134
L. Rath, J.1. In OJC No. 1447 of 1989 the petitioner, an officer of the Junior Management Grade of the State Bank of India, faced a departmental proceeding in a memorandum of charges forwarded in Annexure-1. The allegations against him were that he had claimed false hiring charges of a truck for transportation of his household articles from Bolangir to the place of transfer. Thereafter an enquiry was conducted against him through an enquiring officer. Two witnesses were examined on behalf of the management ; and the petitioner examined three witnesses. After conclusion of the enquiry, the enquiring officer submitted his report to the disciplinary authority. An order passed by the disciplinary authority was communicated to the petitioner that on perusal of the report of the enquiring officer he was of the view that the required evidence had not been properly presented in the inquiry to facilitate arriving at a decision in the matter and hence he was directing a fresh enquiry in terms of...
Bhaskar SwaIn and Sanatan Khatei and ors. Vs. Commissioner of Consolid ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: May-15-1992
Reported in: 1993(I)OLR153
L. Rath, J.1. The important question relating to the interpretation of Section 51 of the Orissa Consolidation of Holdings and Prevention of Fragmentation of Land Act, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Consolidation Act') that falls to be decided in these casses is : whether the consolidation authorities can re-open and decide questions relating to right, title, interest and liability in land lying within the consolidation area when decision regarding such issues have already been reached by competent Revenue Courts or authorities under any local law prior to the commencement of consolidation operation in the area. Both the cases have similar set of facts giving rise to identical questions and hence are disposed of by this common judgment. The facts leading to the filing of the present applications invoking the certio rati jurisdiction may be stated. Opp. party No. 4 in both the cases is the same person She filed two objection in the Consolidation proceedings respectively registered...
Banamali Mohanta Vs. Basanta Kumar Sahoo and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: May-15-1992
Reported in: 74(1992)CLT639; 1992(II)OLR68
A. Pasayat, J.1. Grant of custody of a vehicle during pendency of a case by exercise of power under Section 457 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short, the 'Code') is the subject-matter of challenge in this application.2. The fact situation as portrayed by the petitioner is to the following effect :Opp. party No. 1 Basanta Kumar Sahoo was the owner of a truck bearing registration No. ORJ 4302. On 18-8-1987 he sold thesaid truck to one Raghab Chandra Behera and executed a deed of transfer in favour of Shri Behera and also affirmed an affidavit acknowledging the transfer of the vehicle in question and handed over the original registration certificate book, permanent road permit, fitness certificate, insurance certificate etc. to Shri Behera and also filed an application form for transfer of the vehilce in the office of the R.T.O., Keonjhar. As there was some arrear tax, the ownership of the vehicle could not be transferred in favour of Shri Behera. The petitioner purchased the...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. S.V. Divakar (Through Legal Heir Srikum ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: May-14-1992
Reported in: (1992)105CTR(Ori)115; [1993]201ITR914(Orissa)
A. Pasayat, J.1. Since these references relate to one common judgment of the Tribunal and the statement of the case drawn up by theTribunal is a common one, we are disposing of them by this common judgment.2. At the instance of the Revenue, the following question has been referred for adjudication under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, (in short, ' the Act ' ), by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Cutlack Bench, Cuttack (in short, ' the Tribunal ' ).'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was right in law in holding that the Income-tax Officer had no jurisdiction to consider in a set aside assessment any different source of income not considered in the original assessment ?'3. The background facts as detailed in the statement of the case are to the following effect :The assessment years involved are 1970-71 to 1974-75 for which the late S. V. Divakar (hereinafter referred to as ' the assessee') had filed returns. After ...
Purna Chandra Panigrahi Vs. Baidya Jani and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: May-14-1992
Reported in: 74(1992)CLT309; 1992(II)OLR78
A. Pasayat, J.1. Differing from the view expressed in some decisions of this Court relating to the scope and ambit of Order 1, Rule-8 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (in short, the 'CPC'), this reference has been made by a learned Single Judge.2. Background facts necessary 1or disposal of the reference are delineated as follows:The dispute relates to the deity Dhabaleswar Mahadev installed in village Sapseiate in the district of Kalahandi. According to Puma Chandra Panigrahi, the appellant, he is the hereditary trustee of the deity, which is a temple. Since the Commissioner had directed constitution of non-hereditary Trust Board Under Section {[0-9]}7 of the Orissa Hindu Religious Endowments Act, 1951 (in short, the 'Act'), the appellant had sought for ralief Under Section 41 of the Act. Respondents 1 to 6 filed an application Under Section 41 of the Act claiming that the temple was without hereditary trustee. Appellant's application was registered as O. A. No. 19 of 1986, whereas...
Surendra Kumar Patra and ors. Vs. Arjun Charan Patra and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: May-14-1992
Reported in: 74(1992)CLT427; 1992(II)OLR545
G.B. Pattnaik, J.1. The order of the Consolidation Commissioner, annexed as Annexure 3, is being challenged by the petitioners in this writ application.2. The disputed property appertains to Hal Khata Nos. 107, 16, 117 and Anabadi Khata No. 1299. Nabaghan, the common ancestor; had two sons, Baishnab and Adwait. Baishnab's son Surendra is petitioner No. 1 and Surendra's sons are petitioners 2, 3 and 4. Adwait's son Arjun is opp. party No. 1 and Arjun's wife. Ushamani is Opp.party No 2 and their children are opp. parties 3 and 4. Petitioners' case in a nutshell is that in 1945 Baishnab without the consent of his son Surendra executed a deed of gift in respect of the disputed property which was the joint family property in favour of opp. party No, 1 and his brother Ramesh. It is the further case that notwithstanding the gift, petitioner No. 1 and his family members continued to remain in possession over the property and when the consolidation operation started in the village, the petition...
Bhagirathi Barik and ors. Vs. State
Court: Orissa
Decided on: May-14-1992
Reported in: 74(1992)CLT660; 1993CriLJ828
ORDERS.C. Mohapatra, J. 1. On 25-3-1991 at about 5 p.m. one Seru Saha lodged First Information report at Bhadrak, Rural Police-station that some persons set fire to the house of Piru Saha in another busti of the village. In view of the blaze and sound on account fire on the houses in the Busti, Muslim population of the village became panic stricken and screamed. On suggestion of some Muslim people, they left their houses. He sent his children to the mango grove of Baraju Pati. Thereafter, packing the belongings in two bundles, he ! along with his middle son, left towards the mango grove at about 2 p.m. On the way 20 to 30 unknown persons armed with deadly weapons like Barchha, Farsa, stick surrounded both father and son. They assaulted his son causing bleeding injuries. Finding this he ran to the grove and informed Saha and others of the village who were in the grove. Abhi Jena of the village who was there was requested to give water to his injured son. Abhi went to the spot and return...
Smt. Kodal Bewa and anr. Vs. Orissa State Electricity Board and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: May-12-1992
Reported in: 74(1992)CLT286; (1993)ILLJ474Ori; 1992(II)OLR87
B.L. Hansaria, C.J.1. A poor widow has been dented her rightful claim for more than two decades inasmuch as her husband died while serving under the Orissa State Electricity Board on October 10, 1971 and the family pension due to her has not yet been made available. What can be more shocking than to find that the paltry amount of Rs. 50.-, which was fixed as family pension payable to her, is yet to be made available? It has, therefore, rightly been said that big corporations are heart-less.2. What has stood in the way of the widow in getting the family pension, according to the State Electricity Board, is that till 1983/84, she could not satisfy the mind of the authority that she was the rightful claimant and it was only in 1983/84 that this could be done and on February 21, 1985 the Asst. to General Superintendent wrote Annexure-A/3 speaking about sanction of family pension at the rate of Rs. 50/- per month with effect from October 11, 1991 requesting petitioner No. 1 'to meet the und...
Antaryami Lenka and anr. Vs. Chatrubhuja Alias Bhuja Lenka and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: May-11-1992
Reported in: 1993(II)OLR464
G.B. Pattnaik, J.1. The order of the Consolidation Commissioner dated 31-10- 1984, annexed as Annexure-5 the subject- matter of challenge in this writ application. By the said impugned order the Consolidation Commissioner has set aside the orders passed in Objection Case No. 1305/102 as well as the order passed in Objection Case No. 32/10 and has directed that eight annas interest in the joint family property should be given to opposite party No. 1. The aforesaid order was passed under the following circumstances.After stating facts and submissions to the Court, it is held :4. From the facts alleged and the orders produced in this proceeding, the following admitted facts emerge. Opposite party No. 1 had eight annas interest in the joint family properties and there was an amicable partition in which the said eight annas interest of opp. party No. 1 had been carved out. Opp. party No. 1 had executed a registered sale deed in favour of the petitioners in respect of the lands which he had ...
Maheswar Tripathy and ors. Vs. State of Orissa and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: May-11-1992
Reported in: 1992(II)OLR90
B.L. Hansaria, C.J.1. All these petitions are relatable to Grama Panchayat and Panchayat Samiti elections, the polling in which shall take place from 20-5-1992. The grievances relate to improper acceptance or improper rejection of nomination papers. We have to decide whether we can entertain these petitions.2. The subject-matter is governed by the Grama Panchayat Act, 1964 (for short, 'the Panchayat Act'), or Orissa Panchayat Samit Act, 1959 (hereinafter 'the Samiti Act,). These are the statutes which have conferred the power of contesting the elections in questioh and have set up a machinery for deciding election disputes. As the relevant provisions to which we shall advert hereinafter are similarly worded in the two statutes which we are concerned, we would be referring to the language used in the Panchayat Act, Section 30 of the Panchayat Act reads as below :'No election of a person as a member of the Grama Panchayat or as a Sarapanch or Naib-Sarapanch held under this Act shall be c...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »