Orissa Court March 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.
The National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Prasanna Kumar Mitra and ors. and ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-05-1993
Reported in: I(1994)ACC121; 1994ACJ963; 1993(II)OLR11
A. Pasayat, J.1. In the appear under the Letters Patent the judgment in Miscellaneous Appeal No. 164 of 1986 is assailed. The National Insurance Co. Ltd., (hereinafter referred to as the 'insurer') calls in question legality of the judgment of learned Single Judge on the ground that the entire liability has been erroneously fastened on it. The said appeal and Misc. Appeal No. 151 of 1986 are interlinked. Appellat in both is the insurer. Both have their matrix in Misc. Case No. 4 of 1982 filed by the legal representatives of one Narendra Kumar Khatei (hereinafter referred to as the deceased).2. The background facts relevant for determination of the question whether the judgment of the learned Single Judge is correct are as follows :On 11-10-1981 at about 5 p. m. one Narendra Kumar Khatei lost his life on account of an accident in which a truck bearing registration No. OSP 671 was involved. Prasanna Kumar Mitra is the owner of the vehicle and the vehicle was insured with the insurer. For...
Collector of C. Ex. and Cus. Vs. Golden Hind Shipping (India) Pvt. Ltd ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-04-1993
Reported in: 1995LC62(Orissa); 1993(68)ELT739(Ori)
ORDERS.K. Mohanty, J.1. The legality of the order as in Annexure-3 passed by Customs, Excise and Gold Control Appellate Tribunal (for short Tribunal'), Calcutta directing the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs. 5 lakhs as compensation to the Opposite Party No. 1 in exercise of its powers under Section 129B(1) of the Customs Act, 1962 (for short 'the Act') and subsequent order as in Annexure-5 enhancing the compensation to Rs. 20 lakhs through amendment of the said order in exercise of power under Section 129B(2) are under challenge in this proceeding.2. Shorn of unnecessary details, facts of the case may be stated thus :A Thai fishing trawler belonging to Southern Marine Services Co., Bangkok (hereinafter referred to as the Thai Co.) had been chartered by Golden Hind Shipping (India), New Delhi (Opposite Party No. 1) for fishing purpose. While fishing in Indian waters it was apprehended by Commander I.N.S. Sharabh who brought it to Paradeep Port on 12-9-1980 with crew and cargo consisting o...
Gandu Kerketa Vs. State
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-03-1993
Reported in: 1993(I)OLR474
A. Pasayat, J.1. In this appeal from Special Jail, Rourkeia, Gandu Karketa (hereinafter referred to as the 'accused') calls in question legality, of his conviction for an offence Under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, (in short, the IPC) and sentence of imprisonment for life as awarded by learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Rourkela (hereinafter referred to as the 'trial Judge').2. Filtering out unnecessary details prosecution case as unfolded during trial is as follows :On 8-8-1989, there was marriage function in the house of Udaya Tanti. Chanhati Karketa (hereinafter referred to as the 'deceased') who was the wife of the accused, wanted to participate in the dance which was going on in the marriage function. The accused forbade her to participate in the dance, but the deceased did not pay any heed to the protest of the accused and started to go out of the house. The accused became angry, caught hold of her and threw her on a heap of stone and then dealt several blows on her head...
Sagarmal Sharma Vs. Gajanan Alias Ganjana Sharma
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-02-1993
Reported in: 1993(I)OLR498
A.K. Padhi, J.1. Defendant No. 1 is the petitioner. This Civil Revision has been filed assailing the order dated 5-7-1985 passed by the appellates Court under Order 39, Rule 2-A, CPC.2. The plaintiff has filed Title Suit No. 62 of 1982 praying for partition. During pendency of the suit plaintiff filed an application under Order 39, Rule 1, CPC praying for injunction against the defendant from alienating schedules 'A' and 'B' properties described in the plaint until disposal of the suit. Application for injunction was registered as Misc. Case No. 86 of 1982. Ad interim injunction was passed on 16-12-1982 in the Misc. Case. The plaintiff filed an application under Order 39, Rule 2-A, CPC, on the allegation that defendant No. 1 has executed two sale deeds on 20-12-1982 violating the interim order of injunction passed in Misc. Case No. 86 of 1982. Defendant filed objection to the application under Order 39, Rule 2-A CPC, and submitted that the injunction order has been passed in respect of...
Bansidhar Khatua and ors. Vs. State of Orissa and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-02-1993
Reported in: 1993(II)OLR139
L. Rath, J.1. The only question urged in this petition is inclusion of the two villages, namely, Chuliapasi and Patpur in the Udala N.A C. by virtue of the notification Under Section 4 (3) (b) of the Orissa Municipal Act without excluding the two villages from the Khaladi, Grama Panohayat in which they were earlier continuing. The admitted facts are that the two villages were continuing in the Khaladi Grama Pnnchayat as per reconstitution of the Grama notified Under Section 3 (1) of the Orissa Grama Panchayat Act The State Government issued notification on 30 7-1988 inviting objections to the inclusion of the two villages in the Udala N.A.C. and thereafter the impugned notification was issued on 25-10-1989 declaring inclusion of the to villages in the N.A.C. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners who are inhabitants of the two villages, that the notification was had in law as by the time it was made the two villages were statutorily continuing in the Khaladi Gr...
Bhajaram Chowdhury Vs. State of Orissa and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-01-1993
Reported in: AIR1993Ori248
1. The grievance raised by the petitioner in this case is rejection of his representation by the State Government for reduction of the exclusive privilege amount fixed for the exclusive privilege of the country liquor shop at Bharagada taken by him. The petitioner became the exclusive privilege holder for the year 1990-91 for the shop at a price of Rs. 40,000/- per month. He admittedly failed to pay the dues and instead made a representation to the Collector, Ganjam for its reduction on the plea that because of the natural calamity of inundation on account of heavy rain, the shop was washed away and could not function in November and December of 1990. That application haying not been disposed of and instead distress warrant having been issued against him, he filed O.J.C. No. 4959 of 1990 in this Court which was disposed of on 21-12-90 with direction that even if the petitioner's representation was disposed of, the Collector would re-hear him and that until the representation was decide...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›