Orissa Court November 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.
Chitaranjan Biswal Vs. Orissa Construction Corpn. Ltd. and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Nov-26-1993
Reported in: (1994)IILLJ1178Ori
L. Rath, J. 1. The reliefs claimed by the petitioner are for regularisation of his service under the opp. party No. 1 Corporation with effect from the date of his initial appointment, to treat him as senior to opp. parties 3 to 6 in cadre of Assitant Store Keeper and to quash the order dated April 24, 1990 regularising the services of opp. parties 3 to 6 as also his own retrenchment order, vide Annexure-2. The admitted facts are that the petitioner was initially engaged on October 18, 1976 as an Assistant Store Keeper at the Rengali Dam site in the work- charged establishment of opp.Party No. 1 and he continued as such till May 25, 1979 when he was retrenched from service due to mass strike but was reinstated on August 3, 1979. The period from May 25, 1979 to August 3, 1979 was not treated as discontinuance in service but was treated as duty. The opp. parties 3, 4 5 and 6 respectively joined on N.M.R. basis as Assistant Store Keepers on December 17, 1979, May 8, 1980, June 12, 1980 and...
Rabi Kumar Chhabra Vs. Ginirani Chhabra
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Nov-24-1993
Reported in: II(1994)DMC420
S.C. Mohapatra, J.1. This application arises out of an appeal filed under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act, 1984 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') against an order passed under Section 125 Cr.P.C.2. Stamp Reporter has pointed out that in view of Sub-section (2) of Section 19 of the Act being amended, this appeal is not maintainable. Stamp Reporter is correct. To avoid the stamp report, an application has been filed stating that this appeal be converted to a revision. Now, the office has called upon the appellant to file a second copy of the petition. A second copy is called for when the matter is to be heard by a Division Bench. Possibly, on account of the provision under Section 19 (1) and (6) of the Act that the appeal would be heard by a Division Bench, this second copy has been called for to be filed.3. Section 19 of the Act reads as follows :'19. Appeal--(1) Save as provided in Sub-section (2) and notwithstanding any thing contained in the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 ...
Maheswar Sahu Vs. State
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Nov-24-1993
Reported in: 1994(I)OLR367
L. Rath, J.1. The petitioner was prosecuted Under Section 16(1)(a)(i) read with Section 7(1) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') and was convicted to R1 for six months and fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default to R1 for one month more. The conviction and the sentence having been upheld in appeal, the present revision has been preferred. The brief facts of the prosecution are that the petitioner was running a canteen inside Rourkel Steel Plant and on 16-12-1988 when his shop was raided, he was found to be selling adulterated Jilapi. The Food Inspector (PW 1) who raided the shop along with PW 2, a driver of the N A C , purchased 1.5 kgs. of Jilapi and 375 grams of soyabin oil which he also suspected to be adulterated and dividing the purchased articles into parts, sent samples of those for analysis by the Public Analyst. The report of the Public Analyst was received on 2-2-1989 to the effect that the Jilapi was adulterated having used non-permitted ...
Kholamuhana Primary Fishermen Co-operative Society and ors., Etc. Vs. ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Nov-23-1993
Reported in: AIR1994Ori191
Hansaria, C.J. 1. Chilka. A dream land for the poets and creative artists is now in throes of trouble, leading even to 'Chilka Bachao' movement taken up by eminent persons of the State. This is because Chilka has become a 'stormy island', as a news headlined in Hindustan Times of 13-9-1993 says, and because Chilka is 'getting choked', as flashed in another news of Hindustan Times dated 26-9-1993. The net result is that Chilka, which is the largest inland brackish water-body of its kind in Asia and which used to span before eyes like a dream and offer plenty of opportunities to enjoy and rejuvenate our soul, has become an eye sore because of havocs being played by mafias who have become the real monarchs of Chilka. All this is due to 'prawn-dollar' disaser developing around Chilka, as would be seen from what is being noted later. 2. How can in such a situation Chilka, dear Chilka, provide livelihood to about one and half lakhs of people (both fishermen and non-fishermen) living in and a...
Kali Charan Gouda and ors. Vs. Tara Sankar Acharya and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Nov-23-1993
Reported in: 1994(I)OLR114
A. Pasayat, J.1. A proceeding Under Section 145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short, the 'Code') was directed to be dropped by the Executive Magistrate, Bhanjanagar. The said order was assailed in revision before the tearned Sessions Judge, Ganjam, Berhampur, who reversed the order and remanded the matter to the Executive Magistrate for fresh disposal. 2. In the proceeding before the Executive Magistrate, the four petitioners (Kali, Kedar, Pramod and Binod), and opp. party Nos, 1 and 2 (Tara and Kumud) were members of the second party, while opp, party Nos. 3 and 4 (Biswanath and Raghunath) were members of the first party. Alleging apprehension of breach of peace, a petition was filed on 21-3-1984 for initiation of an appropriate proceeding by opp. party Nos. 3 and 4. By order dated 21-3-1984, a proceeding Under Section 144 of the Code was initiated. Subsequently a proceeding Under Section 145 of the Code was initiated on 21-5-1984. Case of the members of first party was ...
Jogi Sahu and ors. Vs. Umesh Chandra Mishra and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Nov-23-1993
Reported in: 1994(I)OLR391
A. Pasayat, J.1. The conclusion of the learned Munsif, Kodala that he had no pecuniary jurisdiction to try Title Suit No. 58 of' 1978 and consequential direction to the petitioners, the plaintiffs to take return of the plaint was assailed in appeal before the learned Subordi- nate Judge, Aska, who affirmed it. The correctness of the conclusion is questioned in this case.2. A brief reference to the factual aspects is necessary. The suit land measuring A G. A-4 cents was claimed by the plaintiffs as rayati to be, as recorded in the settlement records as per 1951 settlement. They claimed that the viilagers of Manisila have been using some portion thereof as burial ground, a portion as Gochar, and balance as place of worship by installing one village Goddess named Budhima Thakurani. On 1-4 1973, the defendants-opposite parties attempted to cultivate the suit land. The suit was filed to restrain the defendants. It was also claimed in the suit that the Government has no manner of authority t...
State Vs. Smt. Baisakhi Bewa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Nov-23-1993
Reported in: 1994(I)OLR255
L. Rath, J.1. The State is the petitioner seeking quashing of the order passed by the learned SDJM, Keonjhar, refusing to take cognizance Under Section 45, 46 and 83 of the Orissa Forest Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') against the opposite party and the order passed in revision by the learned Sessions Judge, Keonjhar upholding the order passed by the learned SDJM The brief fact is that the premises of the opposite party was raided on 6-8-1987. The raid yielded 77 hand-sawn Sal logs for which she was not able to account. The prosecution report was submitted by the Forester alleging commission of offences Under Section 45, 46 and 83 of the Act. The learned SDJM refused to take cognizance being of the view that there is nothing to show that a person keeping forest produce in his house is liable to be prosecuted under the Orissa Timber & Other Forest Produce Transit Rules (hereinafter referred to as 'the T.T. Rules')and that there is also no provision in the Act or the Rules fra...
Mangturam Agrawal and anr. Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Nov-22-1993
Reported in: 1994CriLJ1912
ORDERA. Pasayat, J.1. The two petitioners faced trial before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Balangir on the accusation that they had exposed mustered oil for sale, which on analysis by the Public Analyst was found to be adulterated to attract culpability under the provisions of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (in short, the 'Act'). They were convicted and sentenced, which got seal of approval of the appellate court. Petitioner Babulal was stated to be the proprietor of the shop which was issued with a food licence bearing No. 193-R-l 38 under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules, 1955 (in short, the 'Rules').2. Matrix of accusation leading to trial is as follows:On 6-10-1985 the Food Inspector, Balangir district visited the shop when the petitioner Mangturam was conducting the business activities, while petitioner Babulal was absent. The Food Inspector purchased 375 grams of mustard oil in presence of the witnesses having suspected that the same was adulterat...
State of Orissa, Represented by the Commissioner of Sales Tax Vs. Kona ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Nov-19-1993
Reported in: 1994(II)OLR44
A. Pasayat, J.1. On being moved by the Revenue under Section 24(2) of the Orissa Sales Tax Act, 1947 (in short, the 'Act'), this Court directed the Orissa Sales-tax Tribunal (in short, the 'Tribunal') to refer the following question for opinion.'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Sales-tax Tribunal is justified to hold that lime is not a paint and the same is taxable as an unspecified commodity @7%, though lime-stone out of which lime is produced is taxable @ 10% ?'Pursuant to that direction a reference has been made.2. Facts on record, necessary to be recapitulated for disposal of the reference are as follows :M/s. Konaik Hardware Mart (hereinafter referred to as the 'assesses') deals with hardware, paints, lime etc. During assessment for the assessment year 1980-81, the assessing officer found that assessee had paid tax @ 7% of the sales of time. He did not accept the assessee's plea that it was an unspecified item. He was of the view that lime comes out of...
Dukhishyam Sahu Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Nov-16-1993
Reported in: 1994(I)OLR18
A. Pasayat, J.1. The short but important point that needs consideration is whether a person accused of having made infraction of the provisions of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (in short, the 'Act'), who has been released on bail during stage of investigation is required to be remanded to jail custody on cognizance of the offence being taken by Seamed Sessions Judge, because the requirements under Section 37(b)(ii) of the Act were not kept in view while bail was granted.2. Facts situation lies within a narrow compass. Petitioner was released on bail as per order of learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Bhubaneswar (in short, the 'SDJM') on 27-11-1990. A direction was given by learned SDJM for appearance of accused before learned Sessions Judge, Purl on 23-4-1993. On that day petitioner was absent and a petition was filed praying for time and it. was allowed till 1-6-1993. On 1-6-1993 adjournment was again sought for, and granted. Date of appearance was fixe...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »