Orissa Court January 1993 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.
Raghunath Mekap and ors. Vs. Gopinath Patra and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-21-1993
Reported in: 1993(I)OLR260
S.C. Mohapatra, J.1. Members of 2nd party are petitioners tin this revision against notice to show cause and to furnish interim bond as required Under Section 107, Cr PC.2. In the notice dated 3-11-1983, learned Magistrate observed as follows;'Whereas it appears 1rom the report submitted by the O.I.C. Town P. S. that the members of second party are in hostile term due to family dispute. The members of second party have formed an unlawful combination and trying to harass the first party in various ways and threatening to assault.Or 23-8-1988 the second party Chhabi Mekap abused and threatened Arta Patri to assault. On 25-8-1988 at 7.40 p. m. Chhabi Mekap suddenly attacked Arta Patri at Raghaba Das Math near Southern gate when Arta Patri was returning to his house from the temple.I am satisfied from the above report that there is apprehension of imminent breach of peace and disturbance of public tranquillity within the local limits of jurisdiction of this Court and actions Under Section ...
Sarala Enterprisers Vs. State of Orissa and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-21-1993
Reported in: 1993(I)OLR355
B.L. Hansaria, C.J.1. The petitioner is partnership firm and own a show house under the name and style of M/s. Laxmi Talkies. It has been granted licence under the Orissa Cinemas(Regulation) Act, 1954 (for short 'the Act') for exhibitions of films. The first such licence was given on 13-10-1983 which was being renewed from time to time as required by the provisions of the Act read along with the Rules framed thereunder. On the petitioner applying for renewal of licence in the office of opp. party No. 2 on 2-4-1990, as at Annexure 3, the communication dated 14-6-1990 (Annexure-2)was issued informing the petitioner that the licence could not be renewed or extended for want of tax clearance certificate. The communication further stated that if tax would not be paid, steps would be taken to close down the show house. This communication owes its origin to Annexure-1 by which Rule 9 of the Orissa Cinemas (Regulation) Rules, 1964 as amended by substituting Sub-rule (2) thereof in the followin...
Durga Talkies and ors. Vs. State of Orissa and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-20-1993
Reported in: AIR1993Ori107; 1993(I)OLR234
Hansaria, C.J.1. The validity of SECTION 5(2) of the Orissa Entertainment Tax Act, 1946 (Orissa Act V of 1946) (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), which was inserted in the Act by the Amending Act, 19 of 1989 has been assailed in these petitions. The notification dated 30-12-1989 issued by the State Government in exercise of the power conferred by the abovementioned section of the Act has also been challenged. The questions of law raised being the same, all the petitions were heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.2. Section 5(2) of the Act is closely connected with Sections 4, 4-A and 5(1) (the last provision as renumbered by the aforesaid Amendment Act). We may, therefore, readthese provisions:--'4. Tax on payment for admission to entertainments.- Except as otherwise expressly provided in this Act there shall be levied and paid to the State Government, on all payments for admission to any entertainment, a tax (hereinafter referred to as the tax) at the f...
Sardool Singh Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-20-1993
Reported in: (1993)IILLJ291Ori; (1993)IILLJ292Ori; 1993(I)OLR402
B.L. Hansaria, C.J.1. The petitioner was a fire fighter and a Head Constable under the Central Industrial Security Force. He had been so appointed on August 2, 1988 temporarily vide Annexure 2 with the stipulation that he would be on probation for a period of two years, but in the event of his being found unsuitable for retention in the post at any time, either during the period of initial training or in the period of probation, his service would be terminated in accordance with the provisions of Rule 19of the Central Industrial Security Force Rules, 1969 (for short, 'the Rules') and paragraph 2 of the Agreement executed with the President of India. On June 8, 1989, an accident took place and in Memo dated 15/16 June, 1989 (Annexure-3) it was stated that the petitioner while driving the fire-fighting vehicle, lost control over the same due to high speed and careless driving, as a result of which the vehicle overturned on the road causing extensive damage to the same as well as injuries...
Surendra Mallik Vs. D. Dei
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-20-1993
Reported in: I(1994)DMC213
S.C. Mohapatra, J.Defendant is appellant against a decree for maintenance.1. Case of plaintiff is that she is legally married wife of defendant since 1964. They continued as husband and wife till July, 1970, during which period a daughter was born to them who died. In July, 1970, plaintiff went to her father's house to nourish her ailing father. On 15-8-1970 she wanted to come back to the house of the defendant to attend Sudhi ceremony but she was not allowed by the defendant. Plaintiff is all along ready and willing to go to the house of the defendant and to live with him but the defendant refuses and does not maintain her. Her ornaments which are with her husband were not allowed to be taken back. On times allegations, she claimed arrear maintenance for two years @ Rs. 70/- per month amounting to Rs. 1,580/- and future maintenance at that rate. Added to it she claims a sum of Rs. 4,000/- towards cost of ornaments and articles.2. Defendant contented the suit. While admitting the marri...
Markanda Naik and Ten ors. Vs. State
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-19-1993
Reported in: 76(1993)CLT22; 1993CriLJ3328
A. Pasayat, J.1. These two appeals are interlinked in the sense that they relate to the same alleged occurrence on 11-5-1984. Since the accused Bipra Naik, appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 144 of 1988, was shown as absconder the trial was split up so far as he is concerned and other eleven appellants in Criminal Appeal No. 119 of 1986 were tried together. Cognizance was taken for commission of offence punishable under Section 302 of the Penal Code, 1860 (in short, 'IPC) against; accused Markanda Naik, Kirtan Naik, Kamaraju Naik, Uma Chandra Naik, Prakash Naik, Gada Naik and Barichha Naik, for committing murder of one Banka Naik (hereinafter referred to as the 'deceased'). Cognizance under Sections 148/302/149, IPC and Section 324/149, IPC was taken against all the accused persons. Cognizance of offence under Section 323/149, IPC was taken against accused Lokanath Naik, Mochia Naik Landa Naik, Gada Naik and Udaya Naik and cognizance of offence punishable under Section 324, IPC was taken...
M. Adu Ama Vs. Inja Bangaru Raja and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-19-1993
Reported in: 1995ACJ670
S.C. Mohapatra, J.1. Claimant is appellant in this appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.2. Case of the claimant is that her son named N. Ramaro was going on his left side of the road in village Gosani on 2.8.1988 at about 5.00 p.m. At that time a bus bearing registration No. OAC 1611 belonging to respondent No. 1 which is popularly known as Nilachal Express bus plying from Gudari to Berhampur, dashed against the deceased at Gosani Chhaka on the road of village Gosani to Parla Khemandi. The deceased sustained multiple injuries and died on the spot. In the claim application it has been disclosed that the deceased left behind his widow, M. Sarojini and daughter, M. Lalita Kumari.3. Owner of the bus filed a written statement denying the accident, the claim and his liability. He disclosed that the vehicle had been insured with the insurer (respondent No. 2) which was valid till 30.8.1988. Insurer filed its written statement denying its liability and also claiming strict ...
Lokanath Pradhan (Dead) and After Him Pravakar Pradhan and ors. Vs. Ba ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-15-1993
Reported in: 1993(I)OLR374
S.C. Mohapatra, J.1. Plaintiff is the appellant against dismissal of a suit for partition of ancestral properties of a Hindu family.2. Case of the plaintiff is that parties were possessing properties for mutual convenience by separation of status but there was no partition by metes and bounds. By amendment of the plaint it was asserted that in case it is assumed that there was a previous partition the same being inequitable, mistakes and not being binding on the plaintiffs is to be re-opened.3. Defendants filed their written statements. Their main case is that there has already been a partition and accordingly, there is no scope for partition afresh. They rely upon the finding in an earlier litigation between the parties where it was held that there has been partition.4. Plaintiff examined five witnesses and proved the documents marked as Exts. 1 to 6. Defendants examined three witnesses and proved the documents marked as Exts. A to E. Considering these materials trial Court held that ...
Raghunath Prusty and ors. Vs. Raghunath Baliarsingh
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-15-1993
Reported in: 75(1993)CLT554; 1993(I)OLR505
G.B. Pattnaik, J.1. Defendants are the appellants against a confirming judgment in a suit for injunction against them restraining them from interfering with the plaintiff's possession in respect of the disputed land.2. Plaintiff's case in a nut shell is that the disputed property measures Ac. 0. 035 decimals appertaining to plot No. 999 in mauza Srichandanpur wherein plaintiff had 12 annas 9 pies interest and one Bali had rest 3 annas 3 pies interest and they were so possessing peacefully. Said Bali sold his interest over the suit poroperty to the plaintiff by executing a registered sale deed on 10.7.1979 and with effect from that date plaintiff became the sole owner in peaceful possession of the property. Defendants having no manner of right, title and interest over the same tried to create disturbances over the plaintiff's possession and hence the plaintiff filed the suit.3. Defendants filed their written statement stating therein that even though Bali was recorded in respect of 3 an...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. J.C. Budharaj and Co.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-13-1993
Reported in: [1993]204ITR656(Orissa); (1994)ILLJ589Ori
A. Pasayat, J.1. At the instance of the Revenue, the following question has been referred to this court for opinion under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short, 'the Act'), by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Cuttack Bench, Cuttack (in short, 'the Tribunal') :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in view of the stipulation in the deed of partnership and keeping in view the duration of contract, the Tribunal was justified in treating retrenchment compensation of Rs. 1,03,147 as allowable under Section 37 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?'2. For the assessment year 1983-84, J.C. Budharaj and Co. (Raising of chrome ore, Kalarangi 'E' Quarry), a partnership firm (hereinafter referred to as 'the assessee') filed its return of income before the Income-tax Officer, Ward A, Bhubaneshwar (in short, 'the ITO'). The return was filed on December 30, 1983, disclosing a total loss of Rs. 12,98,443. During the assessment, it was noticed that the assessee had cla...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »