Orissa Court November 2000 Judgments
Upendra Mohanta and ors. Vs. Saradha Mohanta and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Nov-30-2000
Reported in: 2001CriLJ763
ORDER1. In this application under Section 482, Cr.P.C. petitioners challenge the correctness and legality of the order of the Courts below i.e., Executive Magistrate, Keonjhar in Criminal Misc. Case No. 337 of 1994 vide order dated 22-2-1995 and order of the Sessions Judge, Keonjhar in Criminal Revision No. 53 of 1995 vide judgment dated 11-1-1999.2. The subject-matter of dispute, as stated at the Bar, is Ac. 5.88 decimals of land. On the basis of the report regarding existence of apprehension of breach of peace Criminal Misc. Case No. 337 of 1994 was initiated and ultimately decided under Section 145, Cr.P.C. declaring the possession of the first party members who are the daughters through the first wife of the last male owner Raibu Mohanta. The present petitioners preferred Criminal Revision No. 53 of 1995 and learned Sessions Judge after perusal of the oral and documentary evidence and the impugned order under Section 145, Cr.P.C, refused to interfere with the same on the ground of ...
Tag this Judgment!State of Orissa, Represented by the Commissioner-cum-secretary to Gove ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Nov-24-2000
Reported in: 2001(I)OLR45
R.K. Patra, A.C.J.1. The suspension of opposite party No. 1 having been upset by the Orissa Administrative Tribunal in its order dated 31.7.2000, the State of Orissa has filed this writ application for quashing of the said order.2. Opposite party No.l is the Chief Engineer, Rural Works-I, Orissa, Bhubaneswar. The State Government in the Rural Works Department Order No. 5842 dated 28.4.2000 (Annexure-2) placed him under suspension with immediate effect pending institution of criminal case and/or disciplinary proceeding. He challenged the said order of suspension before the Orissa Administrative Tribunal, Bhubaneswar (hereinafter referred to as ' the Tribunal') in Original Application No. 1217 of 2000. The Tribunal by the impugned order dated 31.7.2000 (Annexure-1) has quashed the order of suspension holding that further continuance of his suspension cannot be allowed.3. Learned Additional Government Advocate submitted that the D.O. letter of the Chief Secretary and the letter of the Gen...
Tag this Judgment!Kanakalata Nath Vs. Pramod Kumar Samantray
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Nov-24-2000
Reported in: 2001(I)OLR62
ORDERP.K. Tripathy, J.1. Heard.In this application Under Section 482, Cr.P.C, petitioner challenges correctness of the order dated 10.8.1999 in I.C.C. Case No. 81 of 1999 of the Court of S.D.J.M., Bhubaneswar. Vide that order learned S.D.J.M. refused to take cognizance against the opposite party and dismissed the complaint on the ground of absence of a prima facie case.2. Allegation in the complaint and the statement of witnesses examined on behalf of the complainant in the inquiry Under Section 202, Cr.P.C. is to the effect that complainant had lodged a report (F.I.R.).before the O.I.C. at Balipatna PS. and when the present opposite party did not take any steps against the accused persons in that case, the petitioner went and reported the matter before the Superintendent of Police and as a reaction to that, as alleged, the opposite party, being the officer-in-charge of Balipatna Police-station, called the petitioner to the Police-station and not only molested her but also assaulted he...
Tag this Judgment!Srimati Tilatoma Das Vs. Sri Rabindra Kumar Das
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Nov-23-2000
Reported in: 91(2001)CLT431; 2001(I)OLR212
L. Mohapatra, J.1. Petitioner in this application under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has challenged the order passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Balasore rejecting her prayer for grant of maintenance under section 125 of the Cr, P. C. as well as the order passed in revision by the learned Sessions Judge, Balasore dismissing the same.2. Case of the petitioner is that her marriage with the opposite party was performed as per Hindu rites and customes in the year 1991 in her father's house and after the said marriage the petitioner lived with the opposite party as husband and wife. At the time of marriage, father of the petitioner had given Rs. 6000/- in cash, one cycle, gold ring etc. to the opposite party apart from other gold ornaments. After marriage opposite patty and his family members illtreated the petitioner, assaulted her and at times did not give her food as the petitioner could not fulfil the demand. Apart from other allegations with regard to ill-t...
Tag this Judgment!Nagen Kumar Samantaray and ors. Vs. State of Orissa and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Nov-21-2000
Reported in: 2001(I)OLR440
ORDERP.K. Misra, J.1. Heard Mr. Das for the petitioners and learned Additional Government Advocate for opposite parties. Since all the cases involve common questions of law and fact, all the writ applications are taken up together and disposed of by this common order.2. The lands of the petitioners had been acquired along with lands belonging to other persons under Notification dated 22.3.1985. Award had been made by the Collector. The present petitioners had not made any application at that stage Under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act (in short, the 'Act') for making a reference to the Civil Court for payment of higher compensation. However, some other affected persons whose lands had been acquired had filed applications Under Section 18 of the Act and. ultimately the compensation amount was enhanced in respect of their lands. Thereafter, the present petitioners filed applications Under Section 28A of the Act before the Collector for payment of higher compensation. The Collector...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Kaberi Banerjee and Others Vs. Orissa State Housing Board and Ano ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Nov-20-2000
Reported in: 91(2001)CLT312
ORDERP.K. Misra, J.1. The petitioners had applied for allotment of house to be constructed by Orissa State Housing Board. As per the Brochure it had been agreed that payment shall be made by way of instalment. Initially, a tentative price was fixed at Rs. 1,99,900/-. Subsequently, the price was increased to Rs. 2,73,370/-. The petitioners have challenged such enhancement in this writ application.2. During the peridency of the writ application, theopposite, parties had reduced the price to Rs; 2,52,000/. Thelearned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that theopposite parties Have arbitrarily increased the price without anyrhyme and reasqn. He has relied upon the decision reported in(1995)3 S. C. C.I (Indore Development Authority v. SadhanaAgarwal (Smt.) and ethers), wherein it has been indicated thatthough there may be escalation, the authority dbes not have'jurisdiction to increase the price arbitrarily. In this connection,the learned counsel for the petitioners submitted t...
Tag this Judgment!Farid Khan Vs. Orissa Lift Irrigation Corporation Ltd.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Nov-17-2000
Reported in: 92(2001)CLT164; 2001(I)OLR18
P.K. Mohanty, J. 1. This is an application for review of the direction contained in paragraph-6 of the order dated 18-8-1998 passed in O. J. C. No. 7864 of 1996, wherein it has been observed that since work-charged establishment has been abolished and there are only D.L.R., N.M.R. and Regular establishments, the petitioner be given a suitable engagement as an N.M.R. employee, in view of the statement made by the learned counsel for the opp. party that the work-charged establishment stood abolished since 1973. 2. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the review petitioner that as there are skilled employees under the work-charged establishment and the petitioner was admittedly working as a work-charged employees, he should be appointed under the work-charged establishment. The learned counsel has invited our attention to the affidavit filed by Sri Surendra Mohapatra, the Secretary of the Corporation in the aforesaid writ application indicating in paragtaph-4 thereof that three empl...
Tag this Judgment!Radharaman Enterprisers Vs. Cuttack Municipal Corporation
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Nov-16-2000
Reported in: 91(2001)CLT108
P. K. Mohanty, J. 1. Petitioner Radharaman Enterprisers, a Proprietory concern, has approached this Court with the following prayer :'Therefore, it is prayed that this Hon'ble Court be pleased to call upon o. p. to show cause and in case they fail to do so or show insufficient cause be pleased to;Directing the opp. party to make payment of the four bills as reflected under Annexure-1 along with interests at the Bank's rate within a short period to be fixed by this Hon'ble Court;AndGranting any other relief(s) as deemed fit and proper;'2. It is the petitioner's case that it supplied various articles as per the order placed by the opp. party-Cuttack Municipal Corporation and it was delivered in phases and bills' were also submitted on different dates for payment, even though name of the bills have been paid but against some the payment has been arbitrarily witheld. The details of some bills have beengiven in the writ petition. The petitioner asserts that it had made a representation to t...
Tag this Judgment!Sunakar Rout and 12 ors. Vs. Ashoka Kumar Mohapatra
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Nov-16-2000
Reported in: 2001CriLJ1068; 2000(II)OLR655
ORDERP.K. Tripathy, J.1. 16.11.2000 - Heard.2. This application under Section 482, Cr.P.C. is disposed of at the stage of hearing on admission with the active participation of both the parties.3. The undisputed fact is that petitioners are the second party members and the opposite party is the first party member in Criminal Misc. Case No. 294 of 1995 of the Court of Executive Magistrate, Kendrapara, and that the said proceeding was initially initiated under Section 144, Cr.P.C. but subsequently converted to a proceeding under Section 145. Cr.P.C. and was disposed of on 6.4.2000 restraining the second party members to enter into the case land till the competent Court of jurisdiction (the Civil Court) passes suitable orders on the claim of the parties. As stated at the Bar, both the parties have filed their written statements and some of the witnesses were also examined during the course of enquiry.4. It appears from the impugned order of the learned Executive Magistrate that he has neit...
Tag this Judgment!Prasadini Guru Vs. State of Orissa and Others
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Nov-15-2000
Reported in: AIR2001Ori63; 91(2001)CLT338; 2001(I)OLR80
L. Mohapatra, J. 1. The petitioner in this writ application has prayed for a direction to the opposite parties to admit her in first year Degree Course in Medicine in any of the Government Medical Colleges of Orissa and quashing the decision of the Admission Sub-Committee dated 24-7-2000 denying admission to the petitioner to the aforesaid course.2. Case of the petitioner is that she has passed Indian School Certificate Examination in the year 1996 with a little more than 83% of marks and come out successful in Annual Higher Secondary Education, 1998 having secured 74% marks in aggregate. Having the requisite qualification she submitted an application to the Admission Sub-Committee, Joint Entrance Examination, (E. & M.), 2000 for admission to first year Degree Course in Medicine and she was allotted Roll No. U M E -56339. In the said Joint Entrance Examination she secured 15th position in the merit list for admission into medical stream. As per the provision of the prospectus the petit...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »