Orissa Court March 1999 Judgments
Jasobanti Thakurani and ors. Vs. Commissioner of Endowments, Orissa an ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-31-1999
Reported in: AIR1999Ori175; 1999(I)OLR608
R.K. Patra, J.1. The petitioners in this writ application seek to assail the validity of the order dated 7-8-1998 of the Commissioner of Endowments, Orissa, Bhubaneswar (Annexure-2) constituting an interim trust board comprising opposite parties 3 to 11 as its members in respect of the institution Jasobanti Thakurani at Dasipur for a period of one year or till formation of Regular non-hereditary trust board, whichever is earlier.2. The case of the petitioners' is that Jasobanti Thakurani (petitioner No. 1) is an ancient village deity. It is an old temple whose origin/foundation is lost in antiquity. Some of the petitioners are recorded as marfatdaris of the deity (Annexure-1, R. O. R. of 1930). Petitioners 2 to9 who belong to the Panda family have been in continuous and peaceful management of the deity for the last four generations. They have also been in cultivating possession of the land of the deity measuring Ac. 8.86 decimals and its usufructs are being utilised for the 'seba puja'...
Tag this Judgment!indramani Sahu and ors. Vs. Vedvyas Gupta and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-31-1999
Reported in: 1999(I)OLR605
P.K. Misra, J.1. This writ application is directed against the orders passed by the House Rent Controller and the appellate authority rejecting the application for eviction filed by the present petitioners on the ground that such application was not maintainable.2. The present petitioners filed H.R.C. Case No. 83 of 1986 for eviction. It was claimed in the said petition that present opposite parties 1 to 3 were the tenants in respect of a building under present opposite parties 6 to 8 who had sold the said property to present opposite party No. 9. It is claimed that present petitioners have purchased different and definite portions of the said building from opposite party No. 9 by six different sale deeds. It is further alleged that opposite parties 4 and 5 were sub-tenants inducted by opposite party No. 3. On behalf of the contesting opposite parties, objection was raised regarding maintainability of one eviction proceeding. The House Rent Controller upheld such objection and held tha...
Tag this Judgment!Dr. Chakradhar Satpathy Vs. Chancellor, Orissa University of Agricultu ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-31-1999
Reported in: 1999(I)OLR672
P.K. Misra, J.1. This review application is directed against the decision dated 27.3.1995 in O.J.C. No. 457 of 1995.2. In the month of April, 1994, an advertisement had been published to fill up the post of Dean of Extension Education in the Orissa University of Agriculture and Technology (in short, the 'OUAT'). The present petitioner was one of the candidates. The Selection Committee had found the petitioner suitable and recommended that the petitioner should be appointed as the Dean. However, before issuance of any order of appointment, the Chancellor intervened in the matter and directed for reconstitution of the Selection Committee and fresh selection Decided on 31st March, 1999. for the post of Dean of Extension Education. Pursuant to the said decision of the Chancellor, a re-advertisement was directed to be made. At that stage, the present petitioner filed OJC No. 457 of 1995. In the said writ application, the University took the stand that a new Selection Committee had been cons...
Tag this Judgment!Damodar Mishra Vs. State of Orissa and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-30-1999
Reported in: 1999(I)OLR642
R.K. Patra, J.1. The petitioner-Damodar Mishra in this application made under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India seeks quashing of the order dated 30.11.1998 at Annexure-12 by which the Orissa Administrative Tribunal has directed the State Government Decided on 30th March, 1999. to 'retain' Ganesh Chandra Barai (opp. party No. 4) at Cuttack as Inspector of Schools till the end of May, 1999.2. BACK-GROUND FACTS :By the notification dated 10.9.1998 at Annexure-1, the Government in the Department of School and Mass Education transferred three Inspectors of Schools. The petitioner was transferred from Jajpur Circle, Jajpur to Cuttack Circle, Cuttack vide the opp. party No. 4 who was transferred from-Cuttack Circle, Cuttack to Puri Circle, Puri. Jagabandhu Patra (opp. party No. 5) was transferred from Puri Circle, Puri to Jajpur Circle, Jajpur who has already joined at Jajpur. The controversy is confined to the petitioner and opp. party No. 4 only. Being aggrieved by the afor...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Sita Bewa Vs. Gangadhar Bharati and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-26-1999
Reported in: AIR1999Ori154
Pradipta Ray, J.1. Plaintiff has filed this second appeal against the judgment and decree dated September 18, 1986 passed by the District Judge, Balasore in M. A. No. 25/84-I confirming those dated April 11, 1984 passed by the Munsif, Balasorc in O.S. No. 134 of 1980-I2. Plaintiff, appellant instituted the suit for declaration that the disputed sale deed dated 22-8-1972 executed by her was fraudulent, inoperative and that no title and interest was conveyed by such deed, for confirmation or in the alternative recovery of possession of the suit land against Gajendra Bharati, since deceased, the predecessor in interest of the present respondents.Plaint case, inter alia, is :3. After death of her husband plaintiff was residing with her brother-in-law (husband's brother) in jointness. Her brother-in-law and son-in-law were implicated in some criminal cases and were under arrest. As there was no other male member in the family the plaintiff had to depend upon the original defendant Gajendra ...
Tag this Judgment!Sagarmal Agrawal Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-26-1999
Reported in: 87(1999)CLT765; [1999]238ITR989(Orissa)
Susanta Chatterji, Actg. C.J.1. The writ petitioner has asked for the following reliefs :'... to admit this writ petition, issue Rule nisi and call upon the opposite parties to show cause as to why the present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution shall not be allowed and issue writ/writs, direction/directions/order as this court may deem proper and more particularly to issue ; (1) Writ of mandamus quashing the circulars of the Central Board of Direct Taxes, dated January 10, 17, 1996, vide annexure-5 series ; (2) Writ of certiorari quashing the decision of opposite party No. 4 vide order dated April 8, 1996, rejecting the petition of the petitioner for exemption certificate under Section 206C of the Act ; (3) Writ of mandamus declaring that screening process adopted by the petitioner amounts to processing within the proviso to Section 206C of the Act and to direct the opposite party No. 5 to grant such certificate so that the opposite party No. 6 agents/servants/branch office...
Tag this Judgment!Biswaranjan Das and anr. Vs. Sarat Kumar Nath
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-26-1999
Reported in: 87(1999)CLT678; 1999CriLJ3434
ORDERP.K. Tripathy, J.1. Heard further arguments from the parties. Petitioners are the accused persons in ICC No. 15/1995 in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Narasinghpur. They have filed this application under Section 482, Cr. P.C. challenging the order dated 30-4-95 by which learned Magistrate rejected the contention of the petitioners that they are protected under Section. 197, Cr. P.C, and the order of cognizance is illegal in the absence of a sanction under that provision of law.2. It is the admitted case of the parties that petitioner No. 1 is the Range Officer and the petitioner No. 2 is the Forest Guard working under the Forest Department and at the relevant time serving under the Narasinghpur Range. It is the further admitted fact of the parties that the complainant/opposite party was a wanted criminal in connection II(b) G.C. No. 65/95 and on 24-4-95 at about 9 a.m. petitioners found and arrested him and took him to the Range Office. It is the further admitted f...
Tag this Judgment!Rajendra Kishore Kanungo Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-24-1999
Reported in: 88(1999)CLT514; 1999(I)OLR626
P.K. Misra, J.1. The petitioner is the father-in-law of deceased Monalisa who had married the son of the petitioner in the year 1994. FIR has been lodged on 30.10.1998 by the father of the deceased alleging commission of offences Under Sections 498A, 304B and 306, read with Section 34, Indian Penal Code, wherein the present petitioner, his wife and son have been arraigned as the accused persons. Investigation in the said case is still continuing. The petitioner and his wife had earlier filed Criminal Misc. Case No. 4721/98 Under Section 438, Code of Criminal Procedure (in short, the 'Cr. P.C') in the High Court. The said petition was withdrawn by order dated 10.11.1998. Subsequently, the present petitioner and his wife filed another application Under Section 438, Cr. P.C. in the High Court which was numbered as Criminal Misc. Case No. 5106 of 1998. In the said application Under Section 438, Cr. P.C. interim protection was given to the accused persons from time to time and ultimately, t...
Tag this Judgment!Basanta Kumar Barik Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-23-1999
Reported in: 89(2000)CLT121; 1999(I)OLR485
A. Pasayat, J.1. Appellant Basanta Kumar Barik (hereinafter referred to as the 'accused') has been convicted by the learned Sessions Judge, Keonjhar for commission of offence punishable Under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short, 'IPC') for allegedly having committed homicidal death of Fakir Charan Barik (hereinafter referred to as the 'deceased'). He was sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life.2. Background facts as presented by the prosecution essentially are as follows :Deceased was the nephew of the accused. Houses of the accused and deceased were adjacent each other and they were living separately in mess and property at Badadanda Sahi, Old Town, Keonjhar. Relationship between the accused and family members of the deceased was strained and on the date of occurrence, i.e., 4.5.1991 the accused abused the father of the deceased and other members of his family in most obscene words and deceased objected to such obnoxious conduct. During the course of quarrel the ac...
Tag this Judgment!Sri Gopinath Jew of Kumarpur and ors. Vs. Brundaban Mohapatra and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-23-1999
Reported in: 88(1999)CLT697; 1999(II)OLR53
A. Pasayat, J.1. In this appeal under the Letters Patent, judgment of learned Single Judge of this Court in First Appeal No. 86 of 1978 affirming the judgment and decree passed in Title Suit No. 151 of 1972 by the learned Subordinate Judge, Athagrarh (hereinafter referred to as the 'trial Judge') is under challenge.2. The facts leading to filing of the appeal essentially are as follows:Plaintiff-respondents in this appeal filed a suit for a declaration that their interest in the property of the joint family in which they were members is not affected by the sale of the property for recovery of damages in Money Suit No. 15 of 1957 and in Title Suit No. 16 of 1960. Their stand was that the decree for damages was against the defendants personally and joint family interest could not have been sold. The suit was decreed. Defendants took the stand in the suit and in the First Appeal that the decree passed against defendant Nos. 17 to 19 were not due to any criminal acts done and the plaintiff...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »