Orissa Court June 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.
Sayad Hyder HussaIn Vs. State of Orissa and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jun-22-1995
Reported in: 1996(1)ALT(Cri)9; 1995(II)OLR105
A. Pasayat. J.1. The only point involved in this application under Sections. 397 and 401 of the Cods of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short, the 'Code') is whether the learned Subdivisional Judicial Magistrate, Sambalpur (in short. 'SDJM') was justified in holding that opp. party No. 2 was entitled to get possession of the seized bus during pendency of the proceeding in G. R. Case No. 1138 of 1994.2. A brief reference to the factual aspects as presented by the petitioner is necessary.Originally the bus bearing registration No. OSS 2411 which is the subject-matter of contention was owned by one Bichittar Singh. On 22-5-1992 said Bichittar Singh entered into an agreement for sale of the said vehicle with Uttam Dash and two of his associates, namely, Bishikeshan Behera and Akhtar Ali. Pursuant to the said agreement, possession of the vehicle was delivered to Uttam Dash and his two associates. As they could not manage the bus properly and sustained loss on account of their engagement in oth...
The Divisional Manager, Representing United India Insurance Company Lt ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jun-22-1995
Reported in: 1(1996)ACC460
A. Pasayat, J.1. The award of compensation made by the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Ganjam, Barhampur (in short, the 'Commissioner') while disposing of a claim petition filed by respondent No. 1 (hereinafter referred to as the 'claimant') is subject-matter of challenge in this appeal under Section 30 of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 (in short, the 'Act').2. The claim petition by the claimant was filed with the following averments:Claimant was conductor of a bus bearing registration No. OSS 8586, owned by respondent No. 2 (hereinafter referred to as the 'owner'). On 24.2.1994 at about noon time the said bus was plying from Gaiba to Rayagada. While the claimant was collecting fare from the passengers, suddenly the back gate of the bus flew open and he fell down from the running bus. He was admitted in the private dispensary of Dr. Ranga Rao of Banerjee Clinic at Parlathamudi by the conductor and cleaner of the bus bearing registration No. OSP 1963, and afterwards he wa...
Executive Officer, Berhampur Municipality Vs. Brundaban Sahu
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jun-21-1995
Reported in: 81(1996)CLT888; 1995(II)OLR412
A. Pasayat, J.1. Executive Officer, Berhampur Municipality (hereinafter referred to as the 'complainant') calls in question legality of order passed by learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Berhampur (in short, the 'SDJM') holding that there was no contravention of the provision of Section 290(1)(w) of the Orissa Municipal Act, 1950 (in short the 'Act') by the respondent Brundaban Sahu (hereinafter referred to as 'accused') as alleged by Municipality.2. Background facts necessary for disposal of appeal are as follows :On 7-4-1984 a complaint was filed by complainant alleging that on 20-9-1933 and thereafter accused was found to have installed three motors of different horse power in his saw mill at Aska Road in Berhampur town without obtaining licence for the year 1983/84 as required under Section 290 of the Act. On 27-7-84, accused had filed an application before the Chairman of Municipality admitting his guilt and expressing his willingness to deposit the requisite fees as is e...
Dandapani Gouda Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jun-21-1995
Reported in: 1996CriLJ834
A. Pasayat, J.1. Appellate order passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Ganjam, Berhampur confirming judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate-cum-Assistant Sessions Judge, Berhampur is the subject-matter of challenge in this revision.2. Background facts sans unnecessary details are as follows :On 26-12-1988 in the afternoon on Kailash Sasmal, who faced trial along with the petitioner went to the house of informant Somanath Patra (P.W. 1) and wanted to know whether his nephew Debaraj Padhi had come there. He identified himself as a friend of said Debaraj. On getting a negative reply, he left on the pretext of receiving him at the bus-stand. He left his bag in the house of Somanath. At the dead of night he came back again to the house and Identified himself as Dandapani Gouda. which is the actual name of present petitioner, arid asked for shelter which was provided. He left in the next morning and again returned in the evening and enquired about ...
Executive Officer, Berhampur Municipality Vs. Rajendra Routo
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jun-19-1995
Reported in: 1995(II)OLR115
A. Pasayat. J.1. Order of acquittal passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Second Class, Berhampur (in short,JMSC') while dealing with a complaint alleging contravention of provisions contained in Sections 264 and 266 of the Orissa Municipal Act, 1950 (in short, the 'Act') is the subject-matter of challenge. Decide d on 19th June, 1995.2. The Executive Officer acting on behalf of the Berhampur Municipality (described hereinafter as 'complainant') is the appellant in this appeal. He lodged the complaint alleging that Rajendra Routo (hereinafter referred to as the 'accused') had undertaken construction without requisite permission. It was indicated that the accused had submitted his building plan on 3-6-1983, but the same was returened to him for rectification of defects on 29-6-1983. On 10-11-1983. and thereafter it was noticed that he had constructed R. C. C. roofed building in Aska Road Street of Ward No. 15 within Berhampur Municipal areas, without requisite permission.3. The acc...
Narayan Patra Vs. State
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jun-19-1995
Reported in: 1995(II)OLR415
A. Pasayat, J.1. Recording of conviction for an offence punishable under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (in short, the 'Act') and consequential sentence of six months' simple imprisonment, and fine of Rs. 1,000/- with a default stipulation as awarded by the learned District and Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Sundargarh, is the subject-matter of challenge in this appeal.2. Prosecution case in a nutshell is as follows :On 27-2-1984 the Inspector of Supplies, Rourkela along with his colleagues inspected the shop of the appellant (hereinafter referred to as the 'accused'), who is a retail dealer in baby food. It was noticed that the accused had not maintained a register of daily accounts in the requisite Form III relating to transaction of baby food in his possession, thereby violating conditions of licence granted under the Orissa Baby Food Licensing Order, 1966 (in short, the 'Licensing Order'). It was further alleged that there was violation of Clause 10 of the Orde...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›