Orissa Court September 1994 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.
Prafulla Kumar Nayak Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-12-1994
Reported in: 78(1994)CLT886; 1994(II)OLR461
ORDERA. Pasayat, J.1. Heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned counsel for State.2. Petitioner was granted bail in G. R Case No. 146 of 1993 by learned SDJM, Karanjia. Subsequent to the grant of bail, charge-sheet was submitted indicating commission of offence punishable under Section 395, IPC. Learned SDJM was of the view that bail was granted on the premises that the petitioner and others had committed offence punishable under Section 384, !PC. In view of the submission of the charge-sheet under Section 395, IPC, bail bonds furnished by the petitioner were to be cancelled. Accordingly, he directed cancellation of bail and issued non-bailable warrant against the petitioner and others. Learned SDJM also took cognizance of offence punishable under Section 395, IPC. According to learned counsel for the petitioner, the order dated 5-3-1994 is indefensible because (a) an order of bail remains in operation unless it is cancelled under appropriate provisions, and (b) ingredients nece...
Divisional Manager, New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Kulamani Behera a ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-12-1994
Reported in: I(1995)ACC703
D.M. Patnaik, J.1. In this appeal the New India Assurance Co. Ltd. assails the order of the learned Commissioner under Workmen's Compensation Act, Cuttack awarding Rs. 29,693.29 paise as compensation to the respondent No. 1--claimant.2. The case of the parties is that the claimant (PW1) at the relevant time was working as Coolie under respondent No. 2 in his truck ORY 532. This truck met with an accident on 2.11.1989 at 10 p.m. near the Kantigadia Octori gate as a result of which the claimant sustained fracture of right hand, head injury and other bodily injuries. The learned Commissioner accepted the evidence of the claimant and that of the doctor and held that the injuries so sustained by the claimant was, and arose, during course of his employment under the respondent No. 2 and accordingly awarded compensation aforesaid which is assailed in this Court.3. Mr. Basu, learned Counsel for the appellant, strenuously urged, firstly that the learned Commissioner committed an error in accept...
Jagannath Mahaprabhu Bije-shree-kshetra Vs. Collector, Puri and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-08-1994
Reported in: AIR1995Ori56; 1995(I)OLR197
R.K. Patra, J. 1. By this petition-under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner Sri Jagannath Ballav Math Endowment Trust Board through its Executive Officer seeks to assail the validity of the notification dated 21-8-1989 published in the Official Gazette dated 29-8-1989 (Annexure-3) under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 by which the Government of Orissa in the Revenue and Excise Department has declared acquisition of land measuring Ac. 0.890 decimals situated at Chudanga Sahi in the town of Puri for public purpose i.e. construction of a modern Gymnasium and Sports hostel. 2. The petitioner claims to be a public endowment located at Dandimala Sahi of Puri town. It owns properties for the benefit of the endowment within the Puri town including Ac. 22.110 decimals of land wherein the math, its temple and garden are located. The petitioner's institution is closely connected with the seva puja of Lord Jagannath and various functions like Chandan Jatr...
Swarup Kumar Biswal Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-07-1994
Reported in: 1994(II)OLR569
K.L. Issrani, J.1. This is a peculiar case where the accused- petitioner has been convicted for an offence Under Section 436 of the Indian Penal Code without affording proper opportunity to him to land his defence evidence. Not only that, but also his application for grant of certified copy of the order was refused by the Court and the learned counsel for the petitioner has filed before this Court the certified copy of his application on which the learned Judge in charge of the Copying Department has mentioned that the application was rejected as per order of the Assistant Sessions Judge as the same applicant had no right to get copy of order. The learned counsel for the petitioner has, therefore filed this revision petition quoting therein the order dated 21-12-1993 passed by the lower Court.2. Submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that there has been a clear violation of the rights of the accused to defend himself for want of a copy of the impugned order in order to...
Muna Mallik Vs. Bishnu Mallik and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-07-1994
Reported in: 1995(I)OLR254
A. Pasayat, J.1. Order of acquittal dated 7-7-1 992 passed in terms of Section 248(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short, (Cr PC) by learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class. Kendrapara, is the subject-matter of challenge, learned Magistrate directed accuittal on the ground that petitioner was unnecessarily prolonging the proceeding, and therefore, the accused-opposite parties are entitled to an order of acquittal. 2. Mr. S.K. Sahoo, learned counsel for the petitioner attaches vulnerability to the order on the following two grounds: (i) There can be no order of acquittal under Section 248(1) Cr PC In the circumstances indicated by the learned Magistrate; and (ii) There was in fact no dilatory tactics adopted by the petitioner. On the contrary after 8-2-1991, i.e. the date on which charge was framed, petitioner was present on seven occasions with his witness, but the accused took time. Therefore, no mala fide intention can be attributed to the petitioner.Mr. G.B. Dash, l...
Aruna Kar Vs. Dr. Sarat Kumar Dash @ Sachhi
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-06-1994
Reported in: II(1995)DMC244
K.L. Issrani, J.1. Present revision petition has been filed by the petitioner-wife against the rejection of her application under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure by the Family Court, Cuttack, in Criminal Proceeding No. 40 of 1991.2. Submission of the learned Counsel for the petitioner is that the Opp. Party-husband has sufficient means to maintain the petitioner but he has neglected and refused to maintain her. The Family Court has rejected her petition on the ground that the petitioner was unable to substantiate her allegations against the Opp. Party. It has been submitted by the learned Counsel for the petitioner before this Court that the petitioner has filed a copy of the complaint in O.S. No. 18 of 1972 filed by the Opp. Party in which allegations against her chastity were made by the Opp. Party. Though the Court referred to this document in its judgment, it has ignored to take note of its effect and that the revision petition be allowed or the matter be referred to ...
Orissa Mining Corporation Limited Vs. Klockner and Company and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-06-1994
Reported in: 1994(II)OLR592
D.M. Patnaik, J.1. 'The judgment is like a pair of scales and evidence like the weights but the will holds the balance in the hands; and even a slignt jerk will be sufficient in many cases to make the lighter scale heavier:Wahately'.2. Mr B. M. Patnaik, learned senior counsel for the Orissa Mining Corporation (for short, the 'Corporation') while strenuously of placing for transfer of the cases Under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure in the file of Shri R. C. Patnaik, Additional District Judge, Bhubaneswar, on the ground of 'reasonable apprehension of denial of justice' submitted that the petitioner apprehends that the balance may be handled unevenly because of bias entertained by the Court in prejudging its case.Mr. C. S. Vaidyanarhan, learned senior counsel for contesting opp. party No. 1, M/s. Klockner a foreign Company (hereinafter referred to as the 'Company'), on the other hand submitted that it is unbecoming on the part of the petitioner, a public sector undertaking under...
Traffic Manager, Orissa Road Transport Company Limited Vs. Secretary, ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-06-1994
Reported in: 1994(II)OLR588
G.B. Pattnaik, J.1. The order of the State Transport Appellate Tribunal (opp. party No. 5) in M. V. Revision No. 10/89. annexed as Annexure-3. is being challenged by the petitioner, a Company Incorporated under the Indian Companies Act and carrying on business of road transport.2. The petitioner had been operating on the route Aska to Durgapur. Opp. party No. 2. State Transport Authority. Orissa, issued an advertisement on 1-9 1986 is respect of the inter- Stata route of Aska to Durgapur covering a length of 654 Kilometres out of which 469 Kilometres is within Orissa and 185 Kilometre is within West Bengal. In accordance with the reciprocal agreement between the two States, the routs was notified Under Section 63(3-B) of the Motor Vehicles Act. 1939 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'). An advertisement was issued Under Section 57(2) of the Act on 1-9-1986 inviting applications from intending operators by 1-10-1986. The advertisement was published in the daily newspaper 'The Samaja'....
Smt. Arana Kar Vs. Dr. Sarat Kumur Dash Alias Nachhi
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-06-1994
Reported in: 1995CriLJ3526; 1994(II)OLR584
K.L. Issrani, J.1. Present revision has been filed by the petitioner-wife against the rejection of her application Under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure by the Family Court, Cuttack, in Criminal Proceeding No. 40 of 1991.2. Submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the opposite party-husband ha9 sufficient means to maintain the petitioner but he has neglected and refused to maintain her. The Family Court has rejected her application on the ground that the petitioner was unable to substantiate her allegations against the opposite party. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner before this Court that the petitioner has filed a copy of the complaint in O. S. No. 18 of 1973 filed by the opposite party in which the allegations against her chastity were made by the opposite party. Though the Court referred to this document in its judgment, it has ignored to take note of its effect and that the revision petition be allowed or the matter ...
Jadumani Seth Vs. State
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-06-1994
Reported in: 78(1994)CLT1000; 1994(II)OLR599
K.L. Issrani, J.1. The present revision petition is filed against th3 concurrent finding; of facts arrived at by both the Court below and convicting the petitioner for six months R.I. and fine of Rs. 1.000/- in default further S.I. for two months Under Section 47 (a) of the Bihar and Orissa Excise Act for purchasing 5 litres of liquor without any authority.2. The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the independent witnesses in this case docs not support the prosecution case The other submission is that the test was not conducted before the witnesses. The third and the last submission is that the trial Magistrate did not properly consider in giving the benefit to the petitioner under the provisions of the Probation of Offenders Act. For this proposition the learned counsel for the petitioner has cited the following case laws : AIR 1974 SC 1818 (Arvind Mohan Sinha v. Amulya Kumar Biswas and Ors.), AIR 1979 SC 964(Bishnu Deo Shaw v. State of West Bengal) AIR 1981 ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »