Orissa Court August 1997 Judgments
Nagappa Mahadev Doddaamani Vs. New India Assurance Co. Ltd. and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-29-1997
Reported in: 1998(I)OLR213
ORDER1. Leave granted.2. The Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs. one lakh for an injury which resulted in shortening of one leg of the victim by approximately two inches. The question of adequacy of the amount of Rs. one lakh as compensation does not arise for consideration since the claimant did not demand a higher amount. However, the insurer challenged the quantum and the High Court had reduced that amount from Rs. one lakh to Rs. 80,000/- only. Hence, this appeal by special leave.3. We are unable to uphold the High Court's judgment reducing the amount of compensation from Rs. one lakh to Rs. 80,000/- for no cogent reasons. It is settled that in appeal interference is made with the quantum of compensation only on the ground of inadequacy or the same being too excessive, as the case may be. Obviously, in this case the amount of Rs. one lakh could not be called too excessive nor was that the view taken by the High Court which merely reduced the amount to Rs. 80,000/- without giving any supp...
Tag this Judgment!Sri Ramakrishna Sharma Vs. State Bank of India
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-29-1997
Reported in: 1997(II)OLR319
P.K. Misra, J. 1. The petitioner has filed this writ application for quashing the notice under Annexure-5, whereunder the State Bank of India, Bidyadharpur Agricultural Development Branch, had advertised for auctioning the gold pledged with the Bank as security for loan obtained by the petitioner. The petitioner has further prayed that the scheme relating to Agricultural and Rural Debt Relief Scheme, as published in 1990 may be implemented and the loan incurred by the petitioner may be waived.2. The facts giving rise to the present writ application are as follows: The petitioner had obtained loan of Rs. 18,000/- from the Bank on 8.3.1989 for establishing a Poultry Farm and had pledged 101.200 grams of gold. The petitioner claims that the Agricultural and Rural Debt Relief Scheme of Orissa (Annexure-2) which came into force in the year 1990 was applicable to his case. As the loan had been obtained for the purpose of agriculture. The petitioner after being aware of the said scheme filed ...
Tag this Judgment!Swaraswati Mohanty and ors. Vs. Tirthananda Badu
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-27-1997
Reported in: 1997(II)OLR325
D.M. Patnaik, J. 1. The plaintiffs are in appeal against the reversing judgment of the lower appellate Court dismissing the suit of the plaintiffs for permanent injunction in respect of the disputed land.2. The plaintiffs claim to be the owner in possession of the disputed land hearing 1962 settlement plot No. 3295 under Khata No. 675/1 situated in Bhubaneswar. They claim to have purchased the land on 21.5.1962 from one Ramesh Chandra Mishra. In the same year the plaintiffs were treated as Stitiban tenants under Lingaraj Mohaprabhu and were recorded as such in 1962 under the Orissa Tenancy Act, 1913. When thereafter the land vested in the State in 1974, the plaintiffs became the tenants under the Government and paid rent. During the current settlement the plaintiffs were issued with Purcha. It is their further case that taking advantage of their absence the defendant threatened to trespass over the land on 16.4.1983 and tried to take forcible possession by constructing pucca wall in a ...
Tag this Judgment!Purna Chandra Samini Vs. Member, Board of Revenue and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-26-1997
Reported in: 85(1998)CLT151; 1997(II)OLR330
P.K. Misra, J. 1. Petitioner and opposite party No. 5 are the sons of opposite party No. 4. A suo motu ceiling proceeding under Chapter - IV of the Orissa Land Reforms Act, 1960 (hereinafter referred to as, the 'Act') was initiated by the Revenue Officer against opposite party No. 4. In the ceiling proceeding, it was claimed on behalf of the present petitioner that since he was a major, married and separated son of Mahadev Saini (present opposite party No. 4) prior to 26th September, 1970, he is entitled to a separate ceiling and his separate property and that of opposite party No. 5 should not be lagged to the ceiling case started against the present opposite party No. 4.Similar objection had also been filed by the present opposite party No. 5. The Revenue Officer after recording the statement of the present petitioner and opposite party No. 5 called upon the Revenue Inspector, Satalma, to submit the report of the Local Committee as well as his report after field enquiry, specially in...
Tag this Judgment!Bishnu Ch. Ojha and ors. Vs. Presiding Officer, Labour Court and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-25-1997
Reported in: 84(1997)CLT740; (1998)ILLJ1195Ori; 1997(II)OLR460
S.N. Phukan, C.J.1. The present writ petition has been filed by ten workmen being aggrieved by dismissal of their application under Section 33C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short, 'the Act') by the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Bhubaneswar, in Industrial Dispute Case No. 8/1987 (Central). All the petitioners were contract labourers since January 1, 1975 under opposite parties 3 and 4, who were supplying labourers to the Paradip Port Trust (for short 'the Port Trust'), and they continued as such till they were employed as C.L.R. on and from November 1, 1980. Before the Labour Court, the petitioners had prayed for equal pay for equal work payable to N. M. R. /C. L. R. workmen under the Port Trust. The application under Section 33C(2) filed before the Labour Court is at An-nexure-6. The grounds, as mentioned in the Statement of the Case (Annexure-A), are quoted below :'That, under Section 25(2) of Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Rules, 1971, a contract labour...
Tag this Judgment!Satya Sethi Vs. State of Orissa and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-24-1997
Reported in: 1997(II)OLR434
S.C. Datta, J.1. This is an application under Section 482, Criminal Procedure Code, praying for setting aside the orders dated 18.12.1994 and 3.1.1995 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Banpur directing custody of the victim girl Basanti Sharma with her father Ramesh Kumar Sharma.2. The case of the petitioner is that he fell in love with Basanti Sharma and later they were married. It is alleged that the father of the girl namely Ramesh Kumar Sharma out of malice, ill-will, vindictiveness and vengeance lodged information with the Officer-in-charge, Banpur P.S. alleging that the petitioner had kidnapped her daughter, Basanti. It was given out that the age of his daughter only 13 years. On receipt of the complaint, the O.I.C., Banpur P.S. took away Basanti and produced her before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Banpur. On 18.12.1994 the learned Magistrate recorded the statement of Basanti under Section 164, Cr.P.C. wherein she claimed that she was 21 years old an...
Tag this Judgment!Lingaraj Flour Mills (P) Ltd. Vs. State of Orissa and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-21-1997
Reported in: [2003]133STC143(Orissa)
A. pasayat, J.1. During pendency of a reference application under Section 24(2) of the Orissa Sales Tax Act, 1947 (in short, 'the Act'), petitioner has prayed for stay of realisation of extra demand raised for the assessment year 1985-86.2. A brief reference to the factual aspects is necessary.An ex parte assessment was made by the Sales Tax Officer which resulted in extra demand of Rs. 23,49,393 inclusive of demand raised under the Orissa Additional Sales Tax Rules, 1975 (in short, 'the Rules'). Petitioner preferred an appeal before the Assistant Commissioner, Ganjam Ranga, Berhampur. The appellate authority reduced the total demand to Rs. 5,21,981. The order of the Assistant Commissioner was assailed by both the petitioner and the Revenue before the Orissa Sales Tax Tribunal. The appeals were numbered as second Appeal Nos. 1035 and 1034 of 1988-89, and 1109 and 1110 of 1988-89 respectively. The Tribunal allowed appeals filed by the Revenue and restored the demands raised by the Sales...
Tag this Judgment!Mulla Md. Abdul and ors. Vs. Sk. Ayub and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-21-1997
Reported in: 1997(II)OLR314
Pradipta Ray, J. 1. The petitioners as plaintiffs instituted O. S. No. 217 of 1986 in the Court of Civil Judge (Jr. Division), Balasore for declaration of their right, title and possession over the disputed land measuring Ac. 0.92 decimals comprising a tank, its embankment and vacant land with trees thereon and for permanent injunction restraining the opp. parties 1 to 7 from interfering with their possession over the disputed land. The petitioners also filed an application being Misc. Case No. 143 of 1986 for temporary injunction. The learned trial Judge by order dated October 14, 1987 granted temporary injunction restraining the opp. parties 1 to 7 from interfering with the petitioners' possession over the disputed land until further orders. The suit, however, came to be dismissed for default on July, 27, 1990. On an application filed under Order 9, Rule 9, C.P.C. the suit was restored to file on December 13, 1991. The petitioners thereafter filed an application before the learned tr...
Tag this Judgment!Paradip Port Workers Union and anr. Vs. Paradip Port Trust and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-21-1997
Reported in: 84(1997)CLT637; 1997(II)OLR519
A. Pasayat, J. 1. The grievance of the petitioners in short, is that, there has been irregular allotment of the quarters by the Chairman of the Paradip Port Trust (in short 'Port Trust') in purported exercise of powers conferred under Clause 25 of the Paradip Port Trust Employees (Allotment of Quarters) Order, 1975 (in short 'Order').2. Petitioners' case is that allotments are being made in a routine manner though discretion for out of turn allotment is to be exercised for 'weighty reasons'. It is pointed out that in the meeting of the Heads of Department held on 22.5.1987, two conditions were indicated under which the Chairman was to make allotment by exercise of powers under Clause 25 of the Order. A grievance is made that the conditions laid down have been by-passed while making allotment.Mr. S.K. Padhi, learned counsel for the Port Trust submits that in each of the cases where discretion under Clause 25 has been exercised had special circumstances and therefore, there is nothing il...
Tag this Judgment!Kirtan Bihari Sahoo Vs. Chairman and Managing Director, United Bank of ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-20-1997
Reported in: 86(1998)CLT789; (1999)IIILLJ611Ori
ORDER1. August 12, 1997 Heard in Part.Call this matter on August 19, 1997. Learned counsel for the opposite parties shall obtain instruction as to whether the opposite party No. 1 is willing to get the petitioner examined at the NIRTAR, Olatpur.Heard learned counsel for parties. There is dispute about percentage of physical handicap of the petitioner. Certain documents have been filed by the petitioner to claim that he is physically handicapped, and the percentage of handicap is 40%.2. According to learned counsel for opposite party No, 1 in the accident which took place in the year 1991 the injury sustained was a simple fracture of the ankle which cannot result in any disability. Petitioner has referred to certain documents to show that the persons who are almost similarly situated have been treated to be physically handicapped and have been retained at the places of their choice, and a departure is being made in the case of petitioner. On the last occasion by order dated August 12, 1...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »