Orissa Court August 1998 Judgments
Natabar Das Vs. Braja Kishore Raha and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-31-1998
Reported in: AIR1999Ori33
1. The plaintiff-appellant has filed title suit No. 109 of 1996 for declaration of right of passage over the disputed land and for permanent injunction restraining defendants 1 and 2 from closing the passage. During the pendency of the suit, an application under Order 39, Rules 1 and 2, C.P.C. was filed which was dismissed by the trial Court after hearing both sides. Thereafter, the plaintiff Tiled Misc. Appeal No. 32 of 1996 under Order 43, Rule 1, C.P.C. before the Additional District Judge, Jajpur. During the pendency of the said appeal, the present appellant filed a Miscellaneous Petition under Order 39, Rules 1 and 2, C.P.C. seeking for ad interim order of injunction against the defendants-respondents forbidding them from changing the status quo of the suit land till disposal of the said Miscellaneous Appeal. In the said miscellaneous proceeding, the Additional District Judge passed an order on 8-8-1997 to the following effect :--'.................The O.Ps. arc directed to set apa...
Tag this Judgment!Graftek Pvt. Ltd. and ors. Vs. Shri Lord Lingaraj Mahaprabhu
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-31-1998
Reported in: AIR1999Ori49; 88(1999)CLT290
P.K. Misra, J.1. The defendants are the appellants against an order passed by the trial Court allowing the application of the plaintiff-respondent for injunction and restraining the present appellants from changing the nature and character of the disputed land and from doing any kind of alienation in respect of the suit land till disposal of the suit.2. The plaintiff-respondent has filed Title Suit No. 235 of 1995 for declaration that defendants I to 4 or their vendor had riot acquired any right of occupancy or any other right in respect of the disputed land. It is alleged that plaintiff is the owner in respect of the disputed land. By Resolution dated 10-3-1937 and 11-3-1937, it had been decided to lease out the disputed land in favour of Dr. Ramendu Ray subject to certain conditions and subject to depositing Rs. 250/-. Though the said Ramendu Ray deposited Rs. 250/-, but the other conditions were not fulfilled and plaintiff continued in possession. On 24-9-1941, the Manager of the pl...
Tag this Judgment!Ferro Alloys Corporation Ltd. and anr. Vs. Union of India (Uoi), Throu ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-31-1998
Reported in: 1999(I)OLR349
A. Pasayat, J.After discussing facts their Lordships have held :12. The concept of per incuriam is that those decisions which are given in ignorance in forgetfulness of some relevant statutory provisions or some authority. Where the judgment does not consider the statutory provision it passes on sub-silentio. Incuria literally means 'carelessness'. In practice per incuriam appears to mean per ignoratium. English Courts have developed this principle in relation of the rule of stare decisis. The 'quotable in law' is avoided and ignored if it is rendered, 'in ignoratium of a statute or other binding authority'. (See Young v. Bristol Aeroplane Co. Ltd., (1944) 2 All ER 293). Same has been accepted, approved and adopted by the apex Court while interpreting Article 141 of the Constitution which embodies the doctrine of precedent as a matter of law. In Jaisri Sahu v. Rajdwan Dubey : AIR 1962 SC 83 the Apex Court while pointing out the procedure to be followed when conflicting decisions are pl...
Tag this Judgment!Jk Corp Limited Vs. Sales-tax Officer and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-31-1998
Reported in: 1998(II)OLR546
A. Pasayat, J.1. All the three cases involve identical points of dispute and are therefore disposed of by this common judgment. Challenge in OJC Nos. 14993 and 14994 of 1997 is to the legality of notices issued by the Commissioner of Sales-tax, Orissa (hereinafter referred to as the 'Commissioner') in purported exercise of powers under Section 23(4)(a) of the Orissa Sales-tax Act, 1947 (in short, the 'Act') read with Rule 80 of the Orissa Sales-tax Rules, 1947 (in short, the 'Rules') proposing to revise the order dated 11.9.1997 passed by the Additional Commissioner of Sales-tax, Southern Zone, Berhampur (in short, the 'Additional Commissioner') in Revision Case Nos. KO-497 and KO-498 of 1996-97. Basis of such notices is the view of the Commissioner that the revisional order is erroneous in so far as it is prejudicial to the interest of revenue.2. The factual aspects need not be dealt with in detail, as the only point that requires adjudication is whether the Commissioner has jurisdict...
Tag this Judgment!Harihar Mohapatra and ors. Vs. Commissioner of Land Records and Settle ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-31-1998
Reported in: 1998(II)OLR495
A. Pasayat, J.1. Order passed by the Commissioner of Land Records and Settlement, Orissa (in short, 'the Commissioner') directing correction of settlement records in terms of the finally published record-of-rights (in short, 'ROR') till a competent Court corrects the entry, is the subject-matter of challenge in this application. The Tahasildar was directed to correct the records accordingly, Prayer of Chema Mohanty, opp. party No. 3 in that regard was accepted.2. The vital point involved is whether the Tahasildar in exercise of power conferred under Rule 34 of the Orissa Survey and Settlement Rules, 1962 (in short, 'the Rules') framed under the Orissa Survey and Settlement Act, 1958 (in short, 'the Act') can change or alter an entry in the finally published ROR in a Mutation Proceeding, for any event which occurred prior to the date of final publication of the ROR. Reliance is placed by the petitioner on the instructions issued by the Board of Revenue (vide Annexure-5) to contend that ...
Tag this Judgment!Sakuntala Chau Pattnaik Vs. Smt. Ratna Prava Mohapatra and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-31-1998
Reported in: 1998(II)OLR360
A. Pasayat, J.1. Petitioner's election as a Councillor of Ward No. 28 of Bhubaneswar Municipal Corporation (in short, the 'Corporation) having been declared null and void by the learned District Judge, Khurda (hereinafter referred to as the 'Tribunal') in terms of Section 21 of the Orissa Municipal Act, 1950 (in short, the Act'),on the basis of an application under Section 19 of the Act, this writ application has been filed.2. Factual position as presented by the parties essentially is as follows : Both petitioner and opposite party No. 1 were contestants for the post of Councillor of Ward No. 28 in the election of the Corporation. Opp. party Nos. 2 to 6 were also candidates. Petitioner was declared elected by the Election Officer (opposite party No. 2) as she secured highest number of valid ballots. Her election was challenged by opposite party No. 1 by filing an election petition solely on the ground-that she was eligible to contest by filing nomination as she was a permanent inhabit...
Tag this Judgment!Tikal Biswal Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-31-1998
Reported in: 1998(II)OLR687
P.K. Misra, J.1. This is an application under Section 439, Code of Criminal Procedure. It is alleged that petitioner and several others have committed offences, inter alia, under Section 302/149, Indian Penal Code, and Section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. The earlier applications for bail on behalf of the present petitioner had been rejected at least on two occasions, as per the certificate furnished in the bail application itself. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated due to political rivalry at the instance of one Chitta Mishra. It is further contended that petitioner is suffering from various ailments inside jail and is not getting proper treatment. The counsel for the petitioner has also submitted that petitioner has remained in custody for more than two and half years and there is no possibility of the criminal trial being disposed of at an earl...
Tag this Judgment!Pappu Alias Susanta Das and ors. Etc. Vs. the State
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-31-1998
Reported in: 1998(2)ALT(Cri)22; 86(1998)CLT485; 1999CriLJ738
A. Pasayat, J. 1. These two appeals are interlinked being directed against the judgment of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Berhampur convicting the present appellants (hereinafter referred to as the 'accused' by their respective names) for commission of offences punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34, and under Section 307 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short, IPC). Each one of them is sentenced to undergo R.I. for life for the first offence and For five years for the second offence.2. In trying to save dignity and honour of his sister, a brother has lost his life and another sustained severe injury. This is the background of accusations which led to the trial and ultimate conviction. Essentially the facts are as follows :Bharati Moharana (P.W. 1) is the sister of Narendra Moharana (hereinafter referred to as the 'deceased'). She at the relevant point of time was a student of Post Graduate Science course of Berhampur University. On 16-11-19.90 she...
Tag this Judgment!Samreeti SwaIn Vs. Utkal University and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-28-1998
Reported in: 1998(II)OLR385
1. The petitioner in this writ application seeks for a direction to the Utkal University-opposite party No. I to declare her rank/position in Bachelor of Arts (Sociology Honours) of three year degree course examination, 1992 as first class First with distinction.2. The case of the petitioner is that she took admission in the three year degree course of Bachelor of Arts (Sociology Honours) in Ravenshaw College, Cuttack in the year 1989. The aforesaid course is a three-year integrated course comprising of examinations at two stage i.e. pre-degree and final degree examinations. She completed the said course by passing the two examinations with roll number 1804C89018. According to the petitioner, the final degree examination is not a separate examination but it is integrated with the pre-degree examination. This is apparent from the fact that the Honours papers in pre-degree are known as Papers-I, II, III and IV and in the final degree as V, VI, VII and VIII. As per the practice in the Utk...
Tag this Judgment!Divisional Manager, New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Ahalya Bai (Smt) ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-28-1998
Reported in: 86(1998)CLT756; (1999)IILLJ1425Ori
P.K. Misra, J.1. This appeal has been filed by the Insurer under Section 30 of the Workmen's Compensation Act (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'). 2. The claimant-respondent No. 1 is the widow of late Ujjalla Sahoo. It was alleged in the claim petition that the aforesaid Ujjalla Sahoo while working as a workman under respondent No. 2 travelling in a truck bearing registration No. ORH 2343 as a head coolie of the truck died in an accident arising out of and in course of his employment. The owner and the driver of the truck arrayed as opposite parties 2 and 3 in the claim petition are respondents 2 and 3 in the present appeal. They had filed a joint written statement wherein it was admitted that the deceased who was a workman had died in an accident arising out of and in course of employment. It was further stated that the truck in question had been insured with the present appellant and, as such, compensation, if any, should be paid by the Insurance Company. The Insurance Company whi...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »