Orissa Court March 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.
Krishna Chandra Naik and ors. Vs. Nilakantha Mohanty and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-25-1995
Reported in: AIR1996Ori1
D.H. Patnaik, J.1. This appeal is by the defendants against the confirming judgments of the Courts below decreeing the plaintiffs suit for declaration of title and confirmation of possession.2. The dispute relates to an area of Ac. 0.040 decimals in Puri town under Khata No. 513/2045 comprising under plot No. 513 measuring Ac. 0.010 decimals and plot No. 513/2045 measuring 0.030 decimals This admittedly stood recorded in the name of Mukta Bewa in the settlement of 1899 as a Sthitiban tenant under the deity Lord Jagan-nath and the land was the Amrutamonehi land of the said deity. Plaintiff claims ownership and possession on the basis that he is the paternal great grand son of Mukta Bewa. Defendants claim ownership and possession by oral purchase for a consideration of Rs. 50/- from said Mukta Bewa in the year 1928. Alternatively they claim to have acquired title by way of adverse possession. The lower Court found the plaintiff to be the descendant of said Mukta Bewa in the line of succe...
State of Orissa Vs. Kisun Sinha
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-23-1995
Reported in: AIR1996Ori59
B.N. Dash, J.1. In this appeal under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (in short, 'the Act'), the State of Orissa represented by the Land Acquisition Collector, Cut-tack has challenged the award passed by the learned Subordinate Judge, First Court, Cuttack in a reference under Section 28A(3) of the Act.2. For the purpose of constructing Kusunpur Minor Irrigation Project, the appellant acquired some lands by issuing notification under Section 4(1) of the Act. The land measuring Ac.2.10 decimals appertaining to plot No. 3 under Khat No. 139 of the respondent was also acquired for the project. Initially, the Collector under the Act passed an award under Section 11 for Rs. 4,547/- which the respondent received without protest. Subsequently, for some other lands acquired for the said project another person namely, Dinabandhu Dayal filed application under Section 18 of the Act for enhancement of the compensation which being received in court was registered as L.A. Misc. case No. 1...
Manoranjan Sahoo Vs. Chandra Kumar Purohit and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-23-1995
Reported in: 1995(I)OLR611
A. Pasayat, J.1. Sole question that arises in this writ application for consideration is whether the petitioner was a defaulter to attract disqualification for contesting election to the office of President, Sambalpur Wholesale Consumer Co-operative Society (in short the 'Apex Society').2. The factual background as. projected by the petitioner is almost undisputed. Petitioner filed nomination for the election to the office of President. Notification was issued for the election in question on 24-3-1994. The Sasan Service Co-operative Society (in short, 'the society') filed an application before the Assistant Registrar of Co-operative Societies for a declaration that the society was a non-defaulting society so that the. petitioner would be eligible to contest the election as a Member of Apex Society. The petitioner also, filed a separate application for granting interim order permitting him to contest the election. The Assistant Registrar admitted the case and passed an order of stay. Pe...
Smt. Jhankaran (Dead) After Her Ramlal Oram and anr. Vs. Member, Board ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-23-1995
Reported in: 1995(II)OLR453
S. Chatterji, J. 1. The present writ application at the instance of the petitioners Ramlal Oram and Minchi Oram claiming to be grandson and daughter of Bhima Oram challenges the impugned order dated 24-1-1985 passed by the Additional District Magistrate, Sambalpur in V. P. A. Case No. 2 of 1979 and also the decision made on 30-5-1989 by the Member, Board of Revenue in V.P.A.R.C. Case No. 6 of 1985, copies whereof are annexed as Annexures-2 and 3 to the writ application. Their further prayer for declaring opposite party No. 4 Chunilal Oram as not performing seba puja at the time of vesting and in lieu of the same, he was not possessing the case land and that the petitioners being substituted in place of Smt. Jhankaran, wife of late Bhima Jhankar were actually cultivating and possessing the entire case land at the time of vesting and as such, entitled for settlement of the entire case land.2. Heard learned counsel for the respective parties. Perused the petition on record. We find that t...
Dinabandhu Behera and ors. Vs. Kalandi Charan Mishra and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-22-1995
Reported in: AIR1995Ori237
ORDERR.K. Patra, J.1. Defendants 1 to 5, the legal representatives of deceased defendant No. 6 and defendants 7 to 25 have filed this appeal against the judgment and decree of the learned Subordinate Judge, Athgarh declaring plaintiff respondent No. 1's right, title interest and possession in respect of the suit land, permanently restraining the appellants as well as defendant No. 26-respondent No. 2 from going upon the land or from interfering with the possession and enjoyment of respondent No. 1 and declaring entitlement of respondent No. 1's right to get the seized paddy valued at Rs. 1000/- in G. R. Case No. 88 of 1972.2, The case of respondent No. 1 hereinafter referred to as 'the plaintiff is that he is the owner in possession of the suit land comprising of an area of Ac. 1.60 decimals out of total area of Ac. 20.50 decimals under plot No. 460 appertaining to khata No. 4 situated in mouza Deuli. According to him, in a proceeding in O. L. R. Case No. 98 of 1976 under section 36-A ...
Basant Kumar Jena and anr. Vs. State of Orissa and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-22-1995
Reported in: AIR1995Ori288; 1995(II)OLR324
V.A. Mohta, C.J. 1. Plot No. 6 under Khata No. 33 with a house standing thereon in village Kendupadar, District Phulbani, a tribal area, was jointly owned by the two uneducated tribals - the petitioners Basant Kumar Jena and Upendra Jena. This property was acquired by the State Government for a public purpose under the Land Acquisition Act (the Act). Compensation for the entire property was determined by the Award at Rs. 10,146/-. Half of the amount was paid to petitioner Basant Kumar Jena on 5-9-1989 and half to Upendra Jena on 12-12-1990. Basant Jena had received the amount under oral protest, and Upendra Jena under written protest. Basanl filed an application under Section 18 of the Act on 12-9-1989 to the Collector for making a reference to the Court for determination of the amount of compensation for the whole of the property. The Collector refused to make a reference on the ground that Basant had not received the amount under protest and, therefore, reference was incompetent in v...
Sri Madhusudan Panda Vs. State of Orissa and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-21-1995
Reported in: 1995(I)OLR664
G.B. Patnaaik, J. 1. The petitioner is an Advocate practising in this Court and challenges the constitutional validity of the Orissa Lokpal and Lokayuktas (Repeal) Act. 1992 (Orissa Act 33 of 1992) (hereinafter referred to as the 'Repealing Act') on the ground that the assent of the President not having been received, the same is hit by Art. 254(2) of the Constitution of India and consequently is ultra vires the Constitution.2. Though in the writ application several allegations of mala fides have been made, but at the hearing of the writ petition, those contentions had not been advanced and only the alleged constitutional infirmity, as stated earlier was presssed into service. Mr. Panda, the petitioner, vehemently argued that the Orissa. Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act, 1970 (Orissa Act 1 of 1971) (hereinafter referred to as the 'Repealed Act') having received the assent of the President under Art. 254(2) of the Constitution/The Repealing Act, the validity of which is being challenged, also ...
Orissa State Financial Corporation Vs. Desari Adinarayana
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-21-1995
Reported in: 1995(II)OLR12
A. Pasayat, J. 1. The only point that arises for consideration in this application under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (in-short the 'Code'), is whether the learned District Judge, Koraput, Jeypore was justified in his view that the petition presented by the petitioner, Orissa State Financial Corporation (hereinafter referred to as the 'Corporation') under Section 31 of the State Financial Corporation Act, 1951 (in short, the 'Act') was not maintainable having been filed beyond the prescribed time.2. The background facts as presented by the petitioner are as follows : On 12-9-1979 Desari Adinarayana, the opp. party herein (referred to hereafter as the 'borrower') applied to the Corporation for sanction of a term loan of Rs. 6,250/- for establishment of a wet grinder industry. On 10-5-1980 he applied for seed capital. On 29-1-1980 the petitioner sanctioned term loan to the limit of Rs. 5,400/-, and on 10-6-1980 the borrower's prayer for seed capital to the limit of Rs...
Pramod Das and Ashok Kumar Sahu Vs. State of Orissa and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-20-1995
Reported in: 1995(II)OLR271
R.K. Dash, J. 1. These writ petitions are filed by two detenus challenging the detention orders passed against them by the Collector and District Magistrate, Ganjam, under the National Security Act, 1980 ('the Act' for short). Since common questions of law and fact are involved both the writ petitions are heard and disposed of by this common judgment.2. The grounds of detention as well as the copies of the orders of detention were served on the detenus at the time when they were detained in custody. To appreciate the questions involved, it is necessary to reproduce the grounds of detention as under :'1. On 19-6-1994 around 10 P. M., Promod Das along with his associates Ashok Kumar Sahu, Narendra Sahu and 3/4 others assaulted one Bhagawan Sahu at Mentu Chhak, Old Berhampur by giving fist blows without any rhyme and reason. A number of people had gathered around the spot at a distance and witnessed the occurrence but none could venture to oppose the activities of these anti-socials. When...
Ganesh Ram Behera Vs. First Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-20-1995
Reported in: II(1995)ACC244; 1995ACJ1085
R.K. Dash, J.1. The petitioner's claim application under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 ('the Act', for short) having been rejected by the First Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Sundargarh, opposite party No. 1, on the ground of limitation, he has filed the present writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the said order.2. The petitioner, it is alleged, met with an accident on 15.9.1992. Since he sustained severe injuries and his right leg was fractured, he was admitted in Ispat General Hospital, Rourkela, where he underwent treatment as an in-patient till 21.3.1993. After being discharged from the hospital, he had joined his duty on 22.3.1993 and obtained all relevant papers from his department and the hospital on 26.3.1993, whereafter he left for Sambalpur, consulted his advocate, drafted the claim petition and filed the same on 30.3.1993. Since there was delay of 15 days in preferring the claim, opposite party No. 1, upon hearing...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »