Skip to content

Orissa Court August 1996 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.

Aug 09 1996

Bapujinagar Khudra Byabasai Association Vs. State of Orissa and ors.

Court: Orissa

Decided on: Aug-09-1996

Reported in: AIR1997Ori189

ORDER1. The petitioner - Bapujinagar Khyudra Byabasai Association represented through its Secretary has filed this writ application challenging the proposed eviction of the street traders from plot Nos. 295 and 304 of mouza Bapujinagar in Bhubaneswar town.2. It is the case of the petitioner that its members had, in order to earn their livelihood, encroached upon portions of Government lands from where they are carrying on their business as cobblers, tailors, barbars, tea-stall owners, fruit sellers, 'Jhumpudi' hotel owners, chat sellers and the tike. According to the petitioner, street-trading is a fundamental right of its members and their eviction would deprive them of their fundamental right guaranteed under Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India and as they will be thrown out of their business, it will amount to depriving them of their right guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. Accordingly, a prayer is made for restraining the opposite parties from evict...


Aug 09 1996

Bidutlata Rout and anr. Vs. Pramod Kumar Rout

Court: Orissa

Decided on: Aug-09-1996

Reported in: 82(1996)CLT636; II(1996)DMC608

Dipak Misra, J.1. The deserted and neglected wife-the petitioner No. 1, along with her innocent, deprived of fatherly care and concern-the minor child, has preferred the present revision claiming enhancement of the quantum of maintenance, being dissatisfied with the order whereby the Judge, Family Court, Cuttack, has awarded maintenance @Rs. 200/-and Rs. 100/- per month in favour of petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 respectively from the date of presentation of the petition under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short 'the Code') forming the subject matter of Criminal Proceeding No. 123 of 1992.2. The essential facts are :-The petitioner No. 1 had married the opposite party in June, 1985 in accordance with Hindu rites. At the time of marriage, the opposite party had demanded Rs. 8,000/-and the father of the petitioner No. 1 being poor could only pay Rs. 5,000/-. After solemnisation of marriage, there was constant demand for the balance amount but as the same could not be paid, t...


Aug 09 1996

Kulamani Das Vs. State of Orissa and ors.

Court: Orissa

Decided on: Aug-09-1996

Reported in: 1996(II)OLR545

P.C. Naik, J.1. The inaction on the part of the Divisional Forest Officer, Dehenkanal (opp. party No. 2) in not disposing of his representation (Annexure-2) has brought the petitioner to this Court.2. Though a lengthy counter has been filed showing that the petitioner has no case on merits, nothing has been said as to why the concerned officer to whom the representation was addressed did not think it proper to pass any order on receiving the representation. We do not appreciate this indifference of the concerned officer. It is. however, submitted by the learned Addl, Government Advocate that for the reasons stated in the counter, it is obvious that there is no merit in the representation and as such, opp party No. 2 was light in not granting relief claimed by way of the representation, in our view the sub mission is misconceived. If a representation is filed and if in the opinion of the officer, it contains some erroneous facts or a claim which is unfounded or which cannot be granted, ...


Aug 08 1996

Bhawani Shankar Satpathy and ors. Vs. State of Orissa

Court: Orissa

Decided on: Aug-08-1996

Reported in: 1996(II)OLR546

A. Pasayat, J.1. A letter addressed to the Hon'ble the Chief Justice of this Court highlighting alleged pollution of several tanks, named Rani Bandh, Talpari Bandh and Get Sarobar within the limits of Municipal Council, Balangir, has been registered as a writ application. In the said letter grievances made that water of said tanks has been turned green and is unfit for human consumption. As there is insufficient supply of water by the Public Health Department, the inhabitants use the water of these tanks for drinking purpose. Due to callous attitude of the authorities, no care or caution has been or is being taken to clean the. water and to maintain its purity so that the inhabitants can use it for domestic purpose. Grievance is made that the tanks, because of non-cleaning regularly have proved to be the source of water pollution leading to unhygienic condition. Steps are not being taken to provide adequate water for domestic purposes, more particularly drinking purpose, and on the oth...


Aug 05 1996

Rati Khora and anr. Vs. the State

Court: Orissa

Decided on: Aug-05-1996

Reported in: 1997CriLJ704

P.K. Misra, J.1. Criminal Appeal No. 387 of 1992 has been filed by the two appellants who have been convicted under Section 302/34, Indian Penal Code, and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life in Sessions Case No. 22 of 1992. After filing the aforesaid appeal through Advocate, a petition has been sent on behalf of both the appellants through jail subsequently which has been registered as Jail Criminal Appeal No. 6 of 1993. Both the appeals are being disposed of by this common judgment.2. The prosecution case, briefly stated, is as follows: Bhagawan Khora, the deceased, along with some others had been acquitted in a criminal case wherein it had been alleged that they had killed one Lachhu Khora, brother of present appellant No. 1. It is alleged that appellant No. 1 bore grudge against the deceased. On 11-9-1991 in the evening, the deceased, Laichhan Hantal (P. W. 4) and Puma Khora (P. W. 5), the brother-in-law and first cousin of the deceased respectively, proceeded towards Barinip...


Aug 01 1996

Jagannath Bardhan (Dead) After Him Sakhi Bewa W/O Jagannath Bardhan an ...

Court: Orissa

Decided on: Aug-01-1996

Reported in: 1996(II)OLR283

Dipak Misra, J. 1. Being aggrieved by judgment in First Appeal No. 187 of 1932 passed by the learned Single Judge reversing the judgment and decree of the learned trial Judge at the instance of Defendant Nos. 2 to 4, the plaintiff No. 2 had preferred this appeal under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent questioning the propriety of the aforesaid judgment, and presently the appeal is being continued after his death by his legal representatives.2. One Padan had filed T. S. No. 148/72 claiming 1/5th share in the Schedule 'A' properties and the entire properties described in Schedule 'B' on a declaration that the deed of partition dated 21-4-1964 was void, inoperative and not binding. He had also prayed for an injunction against the defendants therein from raising any construction on the 'B' Schedule properties. As averred in the plaint he had four'- sons : Jagannath. Baidyanath, Kailash and Jaikrushna. The properties described in 'A' Schedule were the ancestral properties which Padan himself ...


Aug 01 1996

Charan Rout and ors. Vs. Prafulla Kumar Mangaraj

Court: Orissa

Decided on: Aug-01-1996

Reported in: 1997CriLJ1010; 1996(II)OLR427

A. Pasayat, J.1. The scope and ambit of proviso to Sub-Section (2) of Section 202 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Code') so far as it relates to the expression 'ail his witnesses' appearing therein is the subject-matter of reference by a learned Single Judge, who felt it necessary to refer the matter to a Division Bench, as he noticed cleavage of views. While some of the learned Single Judges held that the expression 'all his witnesses' includes the complainant, others held otherwise. The proviso is a new introduction and has no pari materia provision in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 (in short, 'the old Code'). The learned Judges who subscribed the view that the expression 'all his witnesses' includes complainant have emphasised on the fact that complainant is the star witness and therefore, comes under the umbrella of the expression 'all his witnesses'. While expressing the contrary view, other Hon'ble Judges have highlighted that the ch...


  • Next ›

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial