Orissa Court June 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.
Bijayalaxmi Tripathy and Ors. Vs. the Managing Committee of Working Wo ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jun-25-1992
Reported in: AIR1992Ori242; 74(1992)CLT927
Hansaria, C.J.1. Working women of India. What is the extent of right conferred on them by Article 21 of the Constitution is the main point for our consideration in this case? The expanded meaning being given to the word 'life' as embodied in this Article has required this consideration. Maneka Gandhi's case, AIR 1978 SC 597, paved the way for this journey which is still continuing. The other legal point we shall have to examine is whether they can enforce their right under the aforesaid Article against the opposite parties by approaching a writ Court.2. Article 21 has been described by Bhagwati, J. (as he then was) in Francis Coralie v. The Administrator, Union Territory of Delhi, AIR 1981 SC 746 as 'most fundamental of Fundamental Rights'. (page 750). At page 752, it was stated that the 'fundamental right to life ........... is the most precious human right and ............ forms the are of all other rights'. In this connection, we may also note the following observations made by Path...
State of Orissa Vs. Firestone Tyres and Rubber Company of India Ltd.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jun-25-1992
Reported in: [1993]88STC408(Orissa)
Pasayat, J. 1. On being moved by an application under Section 24(2) of the Orissa Sales Tax Act, 1947 (in short, 'the Act'), this Court had directed the Orissa Sales Tax Tribunal (in short, 'the Tribunal') to refer the following question along with statement of facts :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Sales Tax Tribunal is correct to hold that the dealer-opponent is not liable to pay tax on value of the tyre paid in the form of a used one and cash on account of replacement of defective tyres ?'Pursuant to direction, the Tribunal has stated the case for the opinion of this Court.2. Background facts as depicted in the statement of facts are as follows :The dealer carries on business in motor tyres and tubes. For the assessment year 1975-76, assessment was completed by the Sales Tax Officer, Cuttack I, East Circle, Cuttack (hereinafter referred to as 'the assessing officer'), raising a demand of Rs. 45,009 on two counts. The aspect with which we are concerne...
Radha Mohan Nayak and anr. Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jun-24-1992
Reported in: 74(1992)CLT599; 1992(II)OLR369
A, Pasayat, J.1. The appellants (hereinafter referred to as the accused) stood charged Under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short, the 'IPC') allegedly for having committed murder o1 a ten year' old girl namely, Chehalata (hereinafter referred to as the 'deceased'). They have been convicted and sentenced to imprisonment for life by the learned First Additional Sessions Judge, Ganjam, Berhampur.2. The accusation which led to the trial of the accused are to the following effect :On 20-8-1985 between 1 PM to 2 PM the accused were found in the companion of the deceased who had gone out of the school premises during the recess. Her deadbody was found inside the abandoned kitchen room of Laxminarayan temple in village Ankoli situated within Berhampur town. The deadbody was detected around at 4.30 P.M. When the father of the deceased learnt about the incident, he went to his house along with others and enquired from his wife as to whether the deceased had returned home. On ...
Jaheed Alli Vs. Mst. Charguda Feroz
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jun-19-1992
Reported in: 74(1992)CLT471; 1992(II)OLR234
D.M. Patnaik, J.1. In this Misc. Case, the petitioner-husband, a Mohammedan in religion invokes the inherent power of this Court Under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to set aside the order of maintenance. Trie opposite party-wife was awarded a monthly maintenance of Rs. 250/- for herself and Rs. 100/-for her minor daughter. The Magistrate's order was confirmed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Sambalpur2. The opposite party-wife came forward with a case that both of them are Muslims and had married long since. The sons, and three daughters were born out of the wedlock. Sometime in the year 1980, while the petitioner-husband was staying at Btajarajnagar and working as a loader in the Orient Colliery at Budhijam, took a. second wife and thereafter neglected and refused to maintain the opposite party-wife and so she filed a case before the Magistrate Under Section 125 of the Code.The petitioner-husband filed a show-cause. His case was that, no doubt both of them were marrie...
Ramesh Chandra Jena Vs. the State of Orissa and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jun-17-1992
Reported in: 74(1992)CLT385; 1992(II)OLR197
B.N. Dash, J.1. In this application Under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, the Code'), the sole point for determination is whether after passing of an order Under Section 457 of the Code directing release of a seized property in favour of a person, the Magistrate can direct that person to produce the seized property in Court for the purpose of consideration of an application filed by another person with prayer for return of the seized property to him. The facts giving rise to the filing of the present application may be briefly noted.2. The motor-cycte bearing registration No. OIU-4222 was seized by the police on 18-1-1992 as an abandoned or unclaimed property. One Ramakanta Jena (opp. party No. ?.) was the original registered owner of the said vehicle. After the seizure, the petitioner Ramesh Chandra Jena filed an application Under Section 457 of the Code, registered as Crl. Misc. Case No. 14/1992, for return of the vehicle on the allegation that the veh...
Rourkela Construction Private Ltd. Vs. Ravindar Kumar Goyal
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jun-17-1992
Reported in: 74(1992)CLT510; 1993CriLJ1510; 1992(II)OLR242
B.N. Dash, J.1. Being aggrieved by the order of dismissal of his complaint Under Section 203 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short 'the Code') this petitioner has filed this revision.2. The petitioner is M/s. Rourkela Construction Private Ltd., which manufactures and carries on business in various mechanical equipments and spares including Tanks, vessels, stack at Rourkela and it is represented by its manager and principal officer Sri Abhinna Chandra Mohanty, whereas the opposite party is the manager principal officer of M/s. Assam Bengal Roadways Ltd., a transport company, having its registered office at Calcutta and branch office at Rourkela. The petitioner-company having received order from M/s Krishak Bharati Co-operative Ltd., Surat for supply of certain materials by their letter dated 16-9-1987, entered into a contract with the opposite party in which it was decided that the latter would transport the goods from the petitioner's godown at Rourkela to Surat at the rat...
Sitanath Mohanty Vs. Sesi Alias Dungai Bowa and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jun-17-1992
Reported in: 1993CriLJ542
ORDERB.N. Dash, J. 1. The first party member in a proceeding under Section 145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short 'the Code') is the petitioner in this revision. 2. The disputed lands consist of plots Nos.938, 939, 1224, 995, 806, 727 and 745 under old Khata No. 479/98 comprising a total area of A3.63 decimals in mouza Sripurusottampur which correspond to new plots Nos. 951,952, 1021, 1038, 843,419,420 and 453 measuring a total area of A3.59 decimals. On 3-11-1982, the first party made an application under Section 144 of the Code before the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Sadar, Puri with a prayer to restrain the members of the second party from going over the disputed lands which was forwarded to the Officer-in-charge of Delenga Police Station for inquiry and report. On the basis of the police report, the Sub-Divisional Magistrate initiated a proceeding under Section 144 of the Code on 16-11-1982 prohibiting both the parties from entering upon the disputed lands for a perio...
Chayamani Tripathy and anr. Vs. Dharmananda Panda
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jun-16-1992
Reported in: AIR1993Ori23; 75(1993)CLT61
S.C. Mohapatra, J.1. Both plaintiffs are appellants in this appeal under Order 43 Rule 1 (na) Civil P.C. against order refusing permission to them to sue as indigent persons.2. Indigency is personal economic condition. Therefore, in case more than one person intend to sue as indigent persons, indigency of all persons together is to be considered. Even though one of them would be indigent or both individually would be indigent but the means possessed by them together would be sufficient to pay the court-fee payable, permission ought not to be granted. Since indigency is personal, legal representatives cannot take advantage of the indigency of their predecessor in interest who died applying for permission or continued the suit after being permitted. See 1973 (2) C. W. Rule 1792 Smt. Annapurna Das v. Manoranjan Rath, 1987 (1) O. L. R. 313 Bauli Sahu v. Bidyadhar Satpathy. Similarly sufficiency of means; who are to conduct the suit on behalf of plaintiff like guardian, husband, mother or f...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›