Orissa Court February 1995 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.
Bimbadhar Rout Vs. Smt. Kuna Senapati and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Feb-24-1995
Reported in: AIR1995Ori258
D.M. Patnaik, J.1. The sale point for consideration is whether the two sale-deeds executed by the plaintiff in favour of defendant No. 1 conveyed an absolute title in her favour or the same was executed only as a security for the loans incurred by the plaintiff.2. Plaintiffs case is as follows:--The defendants are his distant relations and he had his confidence in them. Defendant No. 2 was serving in Calcutta and on retirement came to the village in 1970 and carried on money lending business under a licence. Even though money landing business was prohibited under the Orissa Money Lenders Act (for short, the 'Act'), yet defendant No. 2 carried on money landing business illegally. To cammouflage his transactions, he used to accept sale-deeds from the parties as securities for the loans advanced by him with an agreement that on repayment of the loan, he would reconvey the land to the loanee by way of sale.The plaintiff borrowed money, on one occasion Rs. 1200/- and on the other Rs. 4,000/...
State Bank of India Vs. Ramayanapu Krishna Rao and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Feb-24-1995
Reported in: AIR1995Ori244
Pasayat, J. 1. Reversal of success by the learned District Judge, Koraput, Jeypore, has brought the State Bank of India (described for convenience as the 'plaintiff) before this Court. The suit is one for recovery of money based on a demand promissory note. 2. The facts position presented by the parties essentially is as follows: First the plaintiff's stand. Plaintiff, a banking company constituted under the State Bank of India Act, 1955, having one of its branch office at Gunupur in the district of Koraput, had advanced loan to the defendants-respondents in this appeal. On being approached by the defendants for loan, cash credit loan of Rs. 4,000/- was sanctioned on 7-6-1977. Defendant No. 1 executed a demand promissory note in favour of defendants Nos. 2 and 3, and the said defendants duly endorsed the said promissory note in favour of the plaintiff-bank on 7-6-1977. Defendants 2 and 3 signed in acceptance of the terms and conditions stipulated in the agreement. Defendant No. 1 hypot...
Bhagaben Pradhan and anr. Vs. Dandapani Pradhan and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Feb-24-1995
Reported in: AIR1995Ori263
D.M. Patnaik, J.1. Plaintiffs are in appeal against the confirming judgments of the courts below dismissing the suit for partition and prayer for exercising right of pre-emption under Section 4 of the Partition Act.2. Manguli, Sambari and Chakra were the three brothers. Plaintiffs 1 and 2 and late Ananta, father of defendants 1 and 2 represent the branch of Manguli. Defendants 3 to 6 being grandsons of Sambari represent that branch.Plaintiffs case is, although the three brothers of Manguli and others had been separated 35 years back, plaintiffs and the defendants continued to live jointly without any partition by metes and bounds. Since defendants 1 and 2 sold the land in dispute by registered sale-deed dated 29-1-1972 to defendants 3 to 6, grandsons of Sambari, the plaintiffs filed the suit claiming that defendants 3 to 6 being strangers to the family, defendants 1 and 2 should have offered the land for sale first to the plaintiffs as per the provisions of Section 4 of the Partition A...
Bichitrananda Panda Vs. Orissa Construction Corporation Ltd.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Feb-23-1995
Reported in: [1999]97CompCas345(Orissa)
Pasayat, J.1. This is an application seeking for an order that Orissa Construction Corporation Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the 'company') be wound up on the ground that it is insolvent and unable to pay its debts.2. Background facts as indicated in the application are essentially as follows :The company was incorporated on 22nd May, 1962 (wrongly described in the petition as 'in the month of 22nd May, 1962') under the Companies Act, 1956 (in short, the 'Act') as a Public (Private) Company Limited by shares. The company is indebted to the petitioner for a sum of Rs. 16,000/- for, and interest admissible from the date of delay, till final payment. The amount is payable for professional services rendered and the details are given in Annexure-A to the petition. Petitioner asked the company for payment of his dues, by his notice of demand duly signed, which was served on the company at its registered office on 23-4-1987. But the company failed to pay the sum or any part thereof. It was...
Cuttack Wholesale Co-operative Stores Ltd. and anr. Vs. Regional Provi ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Feb-23-1995
Reported in: 1996CriLJ1483; (1999)IIILLJ424Ori; 1995(I)OLR367
ORDERG.B. Patnaik, J. 1. In those batch of writ applications, which were heard together as common question of law is involved, the petitioners pray for quashing the criminal proceedings on the ground that there was no liability to deposit the Employees' Provident Fund until the adjudication was finally modified by this Court in the writ petition and was reduced and there has been no delay in making the deposit subsequent to the order of the High Court. In fact, the petitioners had filed an application before the Magistrate in the complaint case in question, but the Magistrate rejected the said prayer on a finding that the accused not having deposited the provident fund dues within the stipulated period, the offence is committed and the accused arc liable to be prosecuted. The accused persons are the Cooperative Society and its Secretary. Petitioner No. 2 who was the Secretary of the Society came on transfer from the post of sub-Assistant Registrar in April, 1984. The Society had been s...
Tara Prasad Pattnayak Vs. State of Orissa and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Feb-23-1995
Reported in: 1995(I)OLR358
G.B. Patnaik, J.1. The petitioner challenges the order of the State Government dated 19th of August, 1994, passed in purported exercise of power under Section 123 of the Orissa Co-operative Societies Act (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'), inter alia, on the ground that the said order has the effect of overriding the provision of Section 28(1- c) of the Act and as such the executive authority cannot have power to override a statutory provision. The order is also challenged on the ground of mala fides.2. The petitioner's case in nutshell is that the Bhubaneswar Town Development House Building Co-operative Society which is the primary society was registered on 18-8-1983 with opp. party No. 3 as the President of the Preliminary Committee. In terms of Section 28(I-c) of the Act, the life of the Preliminary Committee expired on 17.8.1994.' The Secretary of the Committee who is the Chief Executive Requested the Assistant Registrar of Co-operative Societies by tetter dated 18.8.1994 to ex...
Durjyodhan Mallik Vs. State of Orissa, Represented Through Its Commiss ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Feb-23-1995
Reported in: 1995(I)OLR589
ORDER1. Heard learned counsel for both sides.The order of the inspector of Schools, Cuttack-lll Circle dated 15-7-1992 annexed to the writ application as Annexure-7 refusing approval of the Managing Committee of a private High School under the provisions of the Orissa Education (Establishment, Recognition and Management of Private High Schools) Rules. 1991 hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules') is being challenged in this writ application, inter alia, on the ground that no communication having been received from the Inspector of Schools within a period of 30 days in accordance with the first proviso to Sub-rule (4) of Rule 28 of the Rules, the constitution of the new Managing Committee for which proposal had been sent by the Secretary of the School must be deemed to have been approved. Admittedly the School is an aided High School. Therefore, the Managing Committee has to be reconstituted in accordance with Rule 28. According to Rule 28 (1) (iii) the Managing Committee must consist of...
Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd. Vs. State of Orissa and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Feb-23-1995
Reported in: 1995(I)OLR567
S. Chatterji, J.1. This case was heard analogously along with other writ applications, i. e. O. J. C. Nos: 6724 of 1991. 1522 and 1523 of 1992, 6773, 6774, 6793, 6794, 6796, 7561 and 7562 of 1993 filed by the petitioner and also 0. J. C No. 6895 of 1994 challenging the show-cause notices and three assessment orders and praying for quashing the same. This comprehensive Judgment disposes of art the writ applications. 2. The present writ application at the instance of M/S. Bharat Heavy Electrical Ltd. (for short 'BHEL') against the State of Orissa and others including the Commissioner of Sales Tax of Orissa, Cuttack and the Sales Tax Officer, Dhenkanal Circle. Angul besides the Union of India, the States of Tamilnadu, Andhra Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Uttar Pradesh as also M/s. National Aluminium Company Ltd. and the National Thermal Power Corporation Ltd, seeks the reliefs as follows: (1) For issue of a writ In the nature of certiorari or any other appropriate writ and/or order and/or dire...
Laxman Jena Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Feb-22-1995
Reported in: 1995CriLJ3400
D.M. Patnaik, J.1. The appellant assails his conviction under Section 18 of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for Short, 'the Act') and sentence of RI for ten years and fine of rupees one lakh, in default to undergo RI for two years and six months.2. Prosecution case is, on 3-1 -1991 PW5, then Officer-in-Charge of Nayagarh Police Station, received a reliable information that the appellant was possessing opium in his residential house at village Harekrushanapur under Nayagarh Police Station in the district of Puri. After making a station diary entry in regard to this information he along with PW2, the SI of Police, proceeded to the village around 3 a. m., reached the house of the appellant and gave his identity and the purpose of the search. He also asked the appellant of his option to be searched in presence of a Gazatted Officer, but the appellant did not opt for any such search and, therefore, PW5 in presence of the witnesses conducted the search himself. Enteri...
Smt. Annapurna Barik Dei and anr. Vs. Smt. Inda Bewa and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Feb-21-1995
Reported in: AIR1995Ori273
A. Pasayat, J.1. In this appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (in short, the 'CPC), the conclusion that the deed dated 30-8-1975, though styled as a sale deed was in reality adeed for security of loan, is assailed to be incorrect and contrary to evidence With the aforesaid conclusion the suit filed by the present respondents as plaintiffs was decreed by the learned Additional Munsif-cum-JMSC, Balasore, and confirmed in appeal by the learned District Judge, Balasore.2. The fact situation is almost undisputed except relating to the nature of the document. Stands of the parties sans unnecessary details are as follows:Inda Bewa (plaintiff No. I) is the widow of one Bhima Barik. Respondents 2 to 8 (plaintiffs 2 to 8) were their sons and daughters. Appellant No. 2 Rama Chandra Barik (defendant No. 2} is the nephew of aforesaid Bhima, his father being elder brother of Bhima. Appellant No. 1 Annapurna (defendant No. 1) is the wife of Rama Chandra. By a registered sale ...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »