Orissa Court May 1997 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.
Amar Prasad Satpathy Vs. Sitakanta Mohapatra and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: May-06-1997
Reported in: AIR1998Ori66
ORDERR.K. Patra, J.1. This application at the instance of the returned candidate arises out of election petition No. 6 of 1996 which is pending disposal. Prayer made in the application is for a direction to strike off the allegations of corrupt practices pleaded in the election petition. The sum and substance of the ground on which such prayer has now been made is that the copy of the election petition supplied to him does not contain the oath/ affirmation made by the petitioner before the prescribed authority which is mandatorily required under taw and the affidavit being set in conformity with Form 25 and nor in compliance with Rule 94-A of the Conduct of Election Rules, 1961, the allegations of corrupt practices are liable to be struck off.In paragraph 6 of the application, it has been stated as follows :'.....On a bare glance to the copy of the Election Petition supplied to the respondent No. I, returned candidate, it would be abundantly clear that the affidavit is not in conformit...
Divisional Manager, National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Raj Kishore Jethy ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: May-02-1997
Reported in: I(1998)ACC307; 1999ACJ858; 84(1997)CLT851
Pradipta Ray, J.1. Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 being the parents of the deceased filed a claim petition before the Second Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Cuttack for compensation. The said case was registered as Misc. Case No. 498 of 1993. In the said case the claimants filed an application under Section 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 for interim no fault award. Admitted position is that the offending motor cycle was being driven by a minor. The insurance company raised an objection that under the Motor Vehicles Act a minor is not entitled to get a driving licence and accordingly is not authorised to drive any motor vehicle. The insurance company contended that under the terms and conditions of the insurance policy it was not liable to indemnify an owner of a motor vehicle if the same was being driven by a person not having valid driving licence or incapable of having a driving licence under the law. The Tribunal overruled the said objection raised on behalf of the insurance company ...
Satyanarayan Kasanani Vs. State of Orissa and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: May-02-1997
Reported in: II(1998)ACC281; 84(1997)CLT265
P.C. Naik, J.1. Though this matter was listed for admission, on the prayer of the learned Counsel for the petitioner and with the consent of the learned Counsel for the opposite parties, the matter is heard on merits.2. This petitioner Managing Partner of M/s. Sushil Udyog, has approached this Court for quashing Annexure-3 issued by the Regional Transport Authority, Chandikhol requiring the petitioner to show cause as to why the penalty imposed under Section 13(2) of the Orissa Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1975 be not levied and why the demand as mentioned in the notice be not imposed on him in terms of the provisions contained in Section 13(1) of the Orissa Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1975 read with Rule-10 of the Orissa Motor Vehicles Taxation Rules, 1976.3. The case of the petitioner is that the vehicle in question, namely, TATA Sumo was purchased by M/s. Sushil Udyog on 10.9.1996 and in terms of Circular No. 57/96, an affidavit was filed by the petitioner stating that as the said ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›