Orissa Court April 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.
Bachulal Sah Vs. Gita Timber Co.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Apr-21-1995
Reported in: AIR1996Ori3
P. Ray, J.1. The present second appeal is at the instance of the plaintiff against a judgment and decree by which the First Appellate Court reversed the judgment and decree of the trial Court and dismissed the suit for eviction.2. Some material and important facts are stated below:(a) The defendant-respondent obtained the disputed lease on the basis of a registered deed of lease executed on August 30, 1973. The lease was for a period of 4 years from September 1, 1973 at a monthly rent of Rs. 70/- payable according to English Calendar month. It was clearly stipulated in the said deed of lease that in default of regular payment of rent the lessor might re-enter on the land upon determination of the lease by giving 15 days' notice terminating within a month. The lease was obtained in connection with the running of a saw mill which was set up on the adjacent land to the north of the suit land. The plaintiff has alleged that after the expiry of the lease at the request of the defendant, he ...
Sitaram Lal Vs. Jameswar Das
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Apr-21-1995
Reported in: AIR1995Ori260; 1995(II)OLR294
P. Ray, J.1. The plaintiff-respondent filed a suit for specific performance of the registered agreement to sell Ac. 1.99 dec. of agricultural lands executed by the defendant-appellant on February 18, 1975. The defendant-appellant contested the suit alleging that an understanding was reached between him and the plaintiff that the plaintiff would advance a loan of Rs. 3,000/- and he would mortgage 99 decimals of land. According to him, it was agreed that the mortgage would be usufructuary in nature. The further case of the defendant-appellant is that he executed thedocument in good faith upon the impression that it was a deed of mortgage. The defendant has alleged that the said agreement was obtained by practising fraud and deception.2. The trial Court granted decree for specific performance which has been affirmed by the First Appellate Court. The defendant-appellant has preferred the present second appeal against the said judgments and decrees.3. Miss Panda, learned Advocate for the ap...
Ranka Sahu Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Apr-21-1995
Reported in: 1995(II)OLR1
R.K. Dash, J.1. The accused, appellant herein, faced trial in G.R. Case No. 449 of 1983, under Sections 323 and 324, IPC. Upon hearing, the learned Subdivisional Judicial Magistrate, Chatrapur, found him guilty under both the sections and consequently convicted and sentenced him to pay a fine of Rs. 250/-, in default to undergo simple imprisonment for two months, for the offence under Section 323, IPC and rigorous imprisonment for one year for the offence under Section 324, IPC. On appeal, the Second Additional Sessions Judge, Berhampur, confirmed the conviction and sentence recorded by the trial Court. Feeling aggrieved, the accused has come up to this Court by filing the present revision. 2. Shortly stated; the prosecution case is that on 11-8-1983 at about 7 a.m. informant Jura Mohanty (PW 1) had been to irrigate his land which adjoins the land of the accused. Seeing him, the accused who was present there, hurled abuses at him in filthy language, asking as to why he opened the water...
Adikanda Nayak Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Apr-21-1995
Reported in: 1995CriLJ3953; 1995(II)OLR36
R.K. Dash, J.1. The appellant assails the order of conviction under Section 18 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 ('the Act' for short) and sentece of 10 years rigorous imprisonment and fine of rupees one lakh, in default, to undergo further period of 3 years R. I. awarded to him by Assistant Sessions Judge, Kendrapara.2. The prosecution case shotly stated is that on 29-7-1989, night Sesadeb Samal (PW 2), S. I. of Excise, Pattamundai while performing patrol duty along with constables (PWs 1, 4 and 5) received information about the appellant having in his possession contraband opium. Later, finding the appellant coming from Pattamundai side with a bicycle. PW 2 detained him and recovered a packet from his possession which contained opium. The total weight of the opium was 40 grams out of which, the kept 10 grams as a sample for chemical analysis. Thereafter he sealed both the sample as well as the remaining opium in presence of the witnesses, he sent the sample ...
Fagu Das and ors. Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Apr-21-1995
Reported in: 1996CriLJ2245; 1995(II)OLR206
R.K. Dash, J. 1. All these four appeals arise out of judgment and order of the learned Assistant Sessions Judge, Athgarh, passed in Sessions Trial No. 140 of 1988 wherein the appellants have been convicted under Section 295, IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for nine years each, and since common question of fact and law are involved, they were heard analogously and are disposed of by this common judgment. 2. The prosecution case may briefly be stated thus :On 27-3-1986 night while Debaraj Mohanty, PW 4 and his family members were asleep, some unknown culprits armed with gun, knife, etc. forced their entry to his house and at the point of gun and knife ransacked the house and decamped with booties, such as, gold ornaments, cash, radio, clothes, etc. On a report being lodged in Athagarh Police Station a case under Section 295, IPC was registered and investigation was taken up in course of which the appellants were apprehended, some alleged stolen articles were recovered ...
State of Orissa Vs. Gopinath Panigrahi and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Apr-21-1995
Reported in: 1995CriLJ4095
R.K. Dash, J.1. These two appeals by the State are against the judgment and order of the First Additional Sessions Judge, Ganjam, Berhampur wherein he set aside the conviction recorded against each of the respondents under Section 409/34, I.P.C. and sentence of two years rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs. 4,000/-, in default to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for six months imposed by the learned Sub-divisional Judicial Magistrate, Berhampur.2. Accused Dr. Ramesh Chandra Padhi and Gopinath Panigrahi, respondents herein, were the Additional District Medical Officer (Family Planning) and the Cashier respectively in the District Medical Office, Ganjam. It was alleged that they being entrusted with Government money in course of their employment misappropriated a sum of Rs. 30,188/- during the year 1973-74. Hence, they were prosecuted and put on trial under Section 409/34, I.P.C. The learned Sub-divisional Judicial Magistrate upon consideration of the evidence held both the accused...
Shyamlal Pradhan Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Apr-21-1995
Reported in: 1996CriLJ1019
ORDERR.K. Dash, J.1. This revision is directed against common judgment of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sambalpur, passed in Criminal Appeals Nos. 24/15 and 30/16 of 1992. Including the present petitioner there were four accused persons who faced trial in the Court of the S. D. J. M., Rairakhol, under Sections 458 and 392, I.P.C. and Sections 25A and 27 of the Arms Act. Upon trial, each of them was found guilty and convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay fine of Rs. 1,000/- each in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months on each count under Sections 458 and 392, I. P. C. and rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay fine of Rs. 500/-, in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for three months on each count under Sections 25-A and 27 of the Arms Act. All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently. Aggrieved by this judgment, accused persons preferred two appeals separately and the learned Additional Sessions Judg...
Divisional Manager, New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Nandara Bawa and ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Apr-20-1995
Reported in: 1997ACJ200; AIR1996Ori54
P.C. Naik, J.1. This appeal is directed against an interim award dated 22-12-1991 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kalahandi, Bhiwanipatna in N.J.C. No. 13 of 1985.2. Facts giving rise to this appeal are that N.J.C. No. 13 of 1985 was filed by the Respondents 1 to 4 claiming compensation of Rs. 50,000/- for the death of (sic) Guru (the son of Respondent No. 1 and the father of Respondents 2 to 4) in a motor accident on 23-3-1985. Admittedly, on the date of the accident, the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 was in force. During the pendency of the claim petition, M. V. Act, 1939 was repealed on the coming into force of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 with effect from 1-7-1989.3. Along with their petition under Section 110-A, of the 1939 Act, the claimants did not apply for grant of interim compensation under Section 92-A of the Act. However, after coming into force of the M. V. Act, 1988, an application under Section 140 was filed for interim compensation of Rs. 25,000/- for no fault ...
Minati @ Binati Nayak Vs. Gouranga Charan Nayak
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Apr-20-1995
Reported in: II(1995)DMC288
A. Pasayat, J. 1. Heard learned Counsel for petitioner and Opp. Party.2. Petitioner calls in question legality of the order dated 12.7.1994, passed by the learned Judge, Family Court, Cuttack, granting maintenance of Rs. 150/- to the petitioner from the date of order. Alternatively the Opp. Party was directed to pay lump sum of Rs. 12,500/- within six months.3. Grievance of the petitioner in this revision application is that the aforesaid order is unreasoned, and even no basis has been indicated by the learned Judge, Family Court for fixing the quantum at Rs. 150/- when the claim was for Rs. 400/-.4. While fixing the quantum of maintenance, the concerned Court is required to indicate the basis for fixing the quantum at a particular amount. The maximum amount is prescribed in the statute. There must be some reasonable basis for fixing the quantum. Main factor is the income of the person liable to pay. An unreasoned order is practically no order in the eye of law. In fixing the quantum t...
Aintha Behera and ors. Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Apr-20-1995
Reported in: 81(1996)CLT238; 1995(II)OLR61
A. Pasayat, J.1. Petitioners amongst others have been arrayed as accused persons in G.R. Case No. 652 of 1991 on the file of learned Subdivisional Judicial Magistrate, Khurda (in short, 'SDJM') In this application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short, the 'Code') challenge is to the order passed by the learned SDJM taking cognizance of offence punishable under Section 395 of the Indian Penal Code. 1860 (in short, 'IPC'), and directing issue of process/N.B.W. against the petitioners. The said G. R. case has its genesis in Jankia P.S. case No. 120 of 1991 registered on the basis of report lodged by driver of a vehicle bearing registration No. ATO 1188 (truck) which was on its way to Vijayanagaram. The vehicle met with an accident near village Malipada and immediately thereafter some residents of the said village forcibly removed the entire load of 133 bags of tilli seeds which was being carried in the truck and assaulted the driver and other persons travell...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »