Orissa Court October 2000 Judgments
Sukra Sahu and Another Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Oct-31-2000
Reported in: 91(2001)CLT469; 2001(I)OLR154
R.K. Patra, A. C. J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 29-5-1995 of the Additional Sessions Judge, Jeypore in Sessions Case No. 22 of 1994 by which the two appellants Sukra Sahu and Nanda Sahu have been convicted under sections 302/149, I. P. C. and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life each. They have also been convicted under sections 147/148, I. P. C, and each of them has been sentenced co undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months. The sentences are to run concurrently.2. Altogether sixteen accused persons including the two appellants were placed on trial to face charges under sections 147/148/302/149. I. P. C. and the learned Addl. Sessions Judge while acquitting the other accused persons has found the two appellants guilty of the aforesaid charges and convicted them as mentioned above,3. Case of the prosecution is that Ghenu Muduli's (p.w.1) father Mangala had five brothers. Deceased Budu was the son of one of the brothers of Mangala. They were ...
Tag this Judgment!Prabhu Dayal Agrawal Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Oct-31-2000
Reported in: 2001CriLJ754; 2000(II)OLR687
P.K. Tripathy, J.1. This criminal revision is directed against the judgment dated 4.8.1998 in Criminal Appeal No. 45 of 1997 passed by the Sessions Judge, Bolangir.2. The background fact relevant for the purpose is noted as hereunder:Petitioner was arrested and produced before the S.D.J.M., Sonepur on 5.2.1994 for being illegally possessing 149 pieces of woods and planks of different size totally measuring 67.69 c.ft. On 17.11.1994 the prosecution report was submitted against the petitionerUnder Sections 34, 39, 45 and 73 of the orissa Forest Act, 1972 read with Rule 4 of Orissa Timber and Other Forest Produce Transit Rules, 1980, and learned S.D.J.M. on that date took cognizance of the offences under Rule 21 of the said Rules. On 30.3.1995 petitioner pleaded not guilty to the accusation and claimed for trial. During the trial, in his defence petitioner admitted the fact of seizure of the aforesaid woods and planks but claimed that the same were validly acquired under receipts. In cour...
Tag this Judgment!Pradeep Kumar Nayak and ors. Vs. State of Orissa and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Oct-25-2000
Reported in: 2000(II)OLR699
P.K. Mohanty, J.1. In both the aforesaid writ applications order of the Orissa State Administrative Tribunal, Cuttack Bench, Cuttack is under challenge. O.J.C. No. 13016 of 1999 is at the instance of some of the selected candidates for the post of Constable who got themselves impleaded as opp. parties before the Tribunal, O.J.C. No. 13349 of 1999 is by some of the selected candidates who were not parties before the Tribunal, but they have been aggrieved by the order of the Tribunal annulling the selection.2. The brief facts of the case is that the petitioners along with opp. party No. 7 applied for the selection to the post of Constable in the district of Malkanagiri pursuant to an advertisement for that post by the Superintendent of Police, Malkanagiri. Opp. party No. 7 along with other candidates appeared in the physical test, but on measurement of height, weight and chest he was found lacking in minimum prescribed physical standard and, therefore, was disqualified from taking part i...
Tag this Judgment!Natabar Parida and anr. Vs. Bihari Charan Mohanty and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Oct-25-2000
Reported in: 2000(II)OLR636
P.K. Misra, J.1. This writ application is directed against an order passed by the executing Court as confirmed by the revisional Court. There is no dispute that there is a decree for permanent injunction in favour of opposite party No. 1. An application was filed under Order 21, Rule 32, Code of Civil Procedure (in short, the 'C.P.C.') before the executing Court stating that the present petitioners had violated the decree of permanent injunction. The executing Court after finding the present petitioners guilty of the alleged violation directed that the petitioners shall be detained in civil prison for a period of one month and their property shall remain attached for a period of six months. In revision, the said order having been confirmed, the present writ application has been filed.2. Learned counsel for the petitioners first contended that adequate opportunity of hearing has not been afforded by the executing Court to the present petitioners to adduce evidence and as such the matter...
Tag this Judgment!Kamal Lochan Panda and ors. Vs. State of Orissa and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Oct-24-2000
Reported in: 94(2002)CLT151
P.K. Mohanty, J. 1. This writ petition is registered on the basis of a letter/representation received by the Hon'ble Chief Justice from some members of the Ganjam Bar Association, Berhampur.2. The grievance of the petitioners is that, Opp. party No. 1 has been making appointment of Notaries, contrary to the provisions of the Notaries Act, 1952 and the Notaries Rules, 1956 according to its sweet will. It is alleged that in spite of objection filed by the petitioners to the appointment of Opp. parties 2 and 3 as Notaries for Berhampur, they have been appointed as such, in spite of their ineligibility. The petitioners have prayed for a direction to State Government to stop such illegal appointment of Notaries and for a direction that only after inviting application through advertisement and following the due procedure laid down under law, appointment of Notaries should be made.3. Opp. party No. 1 has filed a comprehensive counter affidavit denying the allegations made in the petition. It ...
Tag this Judgment!Rameswar Singh and Others Vs. Tahasildar, Sadar, Sundergarh and Anothe ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Oct-23-2000
Reported in: 91(2001)CLT540
P.K. Misra, J. 1. This writ application relates to orders passed by the various statutory authorities in addling proceeding under Chapter-IV of the Orissa Land Reforms Act (hereinafter called the 'O. L. R Act'). 2. The disputed property relates to Sabik Khata No. 139 of village Kiralaga in Sundeigarh district. The lands in the aforesaid Khata were recorded in the name of one Mandaraj Rautia, who is admittedly dead since long. The aforesaid Mandaraj Rautia had one son, Tetengu, who is also admittedly dead. Dulari Rautia, widow of Tetengu. Admittedly died in the year 1980. It is not disputed that Tetengu had three daughters, Draupadi, Sunamati and Sahabati. Sunamati and Sahabati are also dead. Dhan Singh, Laxmidhar and Sibasankar are three sons of Sunamati. Sahabati has expired without any progeny. In the year 1989, a ceiling proceeding was initiated against Draupadi, the surviving-daughter of Tetengu, and Dulari. Petitioners 1 to 8 are heirs of one Kundan Rautia. The ceiling proceeding ...
Tag this Judgment!Menaka Bewa Vs. Revenue Officer and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Oct-23-2000
Reported in: 2001(I)OLR159
P.K. Misra, J.1. This writ application is filed challenging the orders passed by the authorities in a ceiling proceeding under Chapter- IV of the Orissa Land Reforms act (in short, the 'O.L.R. Act').2. One Ratnakar Nayak, who died in the year 1969 had two wives, His first wife Champabati died in 1940 and the second wife Menaka Bewa is the petitioner. Ratnakar had two sons namely, Sitanath and Radhanath through his first wife. He had two more sons, Sachidanda, Pramod and the three daughters, Ambika, Pra'mila and Kanak through his second wife. A ceiling proceeding bearing No. 82/75 was initiated against Sitanath in respect of all the properties left by Ratnakar. In the said proceeding though it was found that Sitanath and Radhanath, and two sons through the first wife were married and had separated, the proceeding was finalised by giving one ceiling to others. Appeal and Revision filed by Sitanath having proved futile, an application was filed before the Board of Revenue which was also d...
Tag this Judgment!Gangadhar Rout Vs. Additional District Judge, Bhadrak and Another
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Oct-19-2000
Reported in: 91(2001)CLT210; 2001(I)OLR162
P.K. Misra, J.1. Plaintiff has filed this writ application. In O. S. No. 102 of 1981, preliminary decree for partition was passed. During pendency of the final decree proceeding, the plaintiff-petitioner filed an application for amendment of the plaint for incorporation of certain plot numbers and it was also prayed that the preliminary decree may be accordingly amend. On 20-7-1990, the trial court allowed the said petition for amendment by observing that the counsel for defendant No. 1 had agreed that the amendment may be allowed subject to payment of cost. It is not disputed that cost of Rs. 30/- was paid by the plaintiff which was accepted by defendant No. 1. Accordingly, in the plaint the corrected new properties were inserted. Subsequently, defendant No. 1 after about expiry of three years filed a petition for recalling the earlier order. The trial court having allowed such petition and having recalled the earlier order relating to amendment, the petitioner filed revision which ha...
Tag this Judgment!Chenna Jyothirmayi and ors. Vs. Third Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Oct-19-2000
Reported in: 2002ACJ1411; AIR2001Ori108
ORDERP.K. Misra, J.1. Notice by affixture on refusal of opposite party No. 3 is treated as sufficient. In spite of notice, there is no appearance on behalf of opposite parties 2 and 3. Heard Mr. S.C. Sahu for the petitioners and learned Addl. Government Advocate for opposite party No. 1.2. This writ application is directed against the Order dated 31-1-2000 passed by the 3rd. Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bhubaneswar, calling upon the claimants to disclose the place of issue of the driving licence. In a claim case, the primary liability is of the Owner of the vehicle and when the vehicle is insured, the liability is to be discharged by the Insurance Company keeping in view the provisions contained in Sections 147 and 149 of the Motor Vehicles Act. Section 149 of the Motor Vehicles Act contemplates the circumstances under which the Insurance Company can claim exemption from liability. Under Section 149(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, lack of Driving Licence on the part of the driver of t...
Tag this Judgment!Dasarathi SwaIn and anr. Vs. Addl. District Magistrate (L.R.) and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Oct-19-2000
Reported in: 2000(II)OLR644
ORDERP.K. Misra, J.1. Opposite Party No. 4 filed Misc. Case No. 5010/81 before the Revenue Officer, Nimapara claiming that he was a tenant under the Ex-intermediary. The Tahsildar, after making some enquiry accepted the contention that opposite party No. 4 was a tenant under the Ex-intermediary in respect of Ac. 0.80 decimals of land out of Ac. 1.70 decimals of land and further directed that the land should be settled with opposite party No. 4 under Section 4 (l)(h) of the Orissa Land Reforms Act (in short, the 'O.L.R. Act') subject to payment of premium of Rs. 214/-.2. The present petitioners filed O.L.R. Appeal No. 103/82 before the Officer-on-Special Duty (Land Reforms), Puri. The appellate authority set aside the order of the original authority on the ground that there could not have been settlement under Section 4(1)(h) of the O.L.R. Act, as no such application was filed within the stipulated period. He also directed the Revenue Officer not to proceed further in implementing his o...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »