Orissa Court September 2000 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Mayadhar SwaIn and Another Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-14-2000
Reported in: 91(2001)CLT283
P.K. Patra, J.1. The appellants have challenged the judgment dated 19-1-1999 passed by Shri N. N. Praharaj, Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Jajpur in G. R. Case No. 625 of 1998 convicting them under section 20(b) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychetropie Substances Act (hereinafter referred to as the 'Aco') and sentencing each of them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for fifteen years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,00,000.00 (one lakh), in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a further period of one year.2. Prosecution case briefly stated is as follows. The appellants (hereinafter referred to as 'the accused persons') are brothers and residents of village Sapanpur under Barchana Police Station in the district of Jajpur. The first informant (p. w. 8) is a resident of village Nelia under the same police station which is situated near village Sapanpur. It is alleged that in the night of 11-6-1998 (at 12.40 a. m. of 12-6-1998) p. w. 8 accom-panied by his, friends - p ws. 1, 2...
Radhanath Jena Vs. Jadunath Jena and Others
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-14-2000
Reported in: 91(2001)CLT647
P.K. Misra, J.1. The plaintiff has filed this revision againat the order of the trial court directing Issues Nos. II & III to be heard as preliminary issues. The aforesaid two Issues are as follows :--'II. Has the court jurisdiction to entertain the suit. III. Is the suit barred by res judicata in view of the previous decision dated 5-8-95 passed in T. S. No. 105/95of the Court of the Civil Judge (Sr. Division), First Court, Cuttack ?' 2. So far as Issue No. II is concerned, it may be necessary for the patties to adduce evidence relating to the territorial jurisdiction of the trial court and at this stage it cannot be said that the said question is a pure question of law. Similarly, so far as Issue No. III is concerned, it is the case of the plaintiff that the decision in T. S. No. 105/95 was obtained by fraud. For deciding as to whether such a decree was obtained by fraud, it is necessary for the parties to adduce evidence. In other words, both the Issues may require some evidence to...
Bhabani Panda Alias Das Vs. Santosh Kumar Panda and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-14-2000
Reported in: 2001(I)OLR300
ORDERP.K. Misra, J.1. This application has been filed for recalling the order dated 7.8.2000. The main ground in support of such petition is to the effect that the applicant, who was the opposite party No.l in the writ application, had entered appearance by filing Vakalatnama on 1.8.2000 and yet in the Cause-List dated 7.8.2000, the names of the counsels were not indicated and as such the opposite party No. 1 could not be heard. It is also submitted, in the alternative, that in the notice which had been sent, 20.7.2000 was indicated to be the date of appearance, but, in fact, the notice was served on opposite party No. 1 on 29.7.2000 and thus, the notice was ineffective and without issuing fresh notice, the writ application should not have been taken up for disposal,2. Affidavit of opposite party No.l himself was filed in support of such averments. The relevant portions contained in the petition are extracted hereunder :' 2. That the notice of the present writ application was served on...
Ajit Kumar Patnaik Vs. Republic of India
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-14-2000
Reported in: 2000(II)OLR475
P.K. Patra, J. 1. The appellant has challenged the judgment dated 29.6.1988 in T.R.No. 34 of 1983 passed by Shri D.M.Patnaik, Special Judge, Bhubaneswar convicting him under Section 5(1)(d) read with Section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as the Act') and under Sections. 420/467/468/471 of Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as 'IPC') and sentencing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year on each count and directing the sentences to run concurrently. Further he was sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000.00 (one thousand), in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for fifteen days.2. Prosecution case briefly stated is as follows. During the period 1979-80, one Ramakanta Mohanty (who was a co-accused of the present appellant and since acquitted) who was a probation officer of the Indian Overseas Bank was deputed to work as the Branch Manager of Puri Branch of Puri Gramya Bank which was sponsored by the Indian Overseas Bank and the...
Harekrushna Jena Vs. State of Orissa and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-14-2000
Reported in: 90(2000)CLT698; 2000(II)OLR575
ORDERP.K. Misra, J.1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. The present petitioner claims to be the tenant in respect of the disputed land. The petitioner had filed a proceeding under Section 36-A of the Orissa Land Reforms Act (in short, the 'O.L.R. Act') before the Revenue Officer, Basta. The said case came to the High Court in a writ application wherein the High Court remanded the matter to the Revenue Officer for fresh disposal. While the O.L.R. proceeding was pending, the present opposite party No. 8 had purchased the disputed land from the previous owner namely, Pruthunath Patra. After the case was remanded by the High Court to the Revenue Officer, the purchaser filed an application under Order 1, Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure (in short, the 'C.P.C.') for being impleaded as a party. The said application having been rejected, the matter again came to the High Court. The High Court permitted the purchaser to be impleaded as party and to file objection subject to certain c...
Sukadev Samantaray Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-14-2000
Reported in: 2001(73)ECC382; 2000(II)OLR487
P.K. Patra, J.1. The appellant has challenged the judgment dated 11.10.1999 passed by Shri N.N. Praharaj, Special Judge, Jajpur in 2(a) CC Nos. 83 of 1992 and 39 of 1993 convicting him of the charge under Section 20(b) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') and sentencing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,00,000.00 (one lakh), in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a further period of one year.2. Prosecution case briefly stated is as follows: On 7.8.1992 at about 3 p.m. while P.W.3, a Sub-Inspector of Excise, E.I. & E.B., Unit-I, Cuttack was performing patrol duty in village Ekadalia, received information from P.W.4, a co-villager of the appellant (hereinafter referred to as 'the accused'), that the accused had concealed Ganja under a bush at the outskirt of the village. So he proceeded to the spot with his staff being led by P.W.4 and found that the accused was pulling out ...
Jadunath Dhal Vs. State of Orissa and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-14-2000
Reported in: 90(2000)CLT804; 2000(II)OLR573
ORDERP.K. Misra, J.1. Heard counsel for the petitioner and learned Addl. Government Advocate for opposite parties. This writ application arises against the decision of the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Anandpur, refusing to answer the reference made under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act on the ground that the Civil Court has no jurisdiction to consider the Kissam of the land under Section 18 of the Act. In the present case, after the award was made, the present petitioner had filed an application before the Land Acquisition Collector for making a reference to the Civil Court claiming higher compensation on the ground that the Kisam of the land had not been properly ascertained or verified by the Land Acquisition Collector. The Civil Judge seems to be of the opinion that in a reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, the Civil Court can only decide the measurement of the land, the amount of compensation, the person to whom it is payable, or the apportionment of the...
Mohan Parida Vs. State
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-14-2000
Reported in: 2001CriLJ410
ORDERP.K. Patra, J.1. The appellant has challenged the judgment dated 20-11-1994 in S.T. No. 51/259 of 1993 passed by Shri N.K.Rajguru Mohapatra, Ist Additional Sessions Judge, Puri convicting the appellant under Section 20(a) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') and sentencing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years and to pay a fine of Rs. 20,000.00 (Rupees twenty thousand), in default, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months more.2. The prosecution case briefly stated is as follows :On 29-4-1992 getting information about large scale cultivation of cannabis plants (hemp plants) in village Padabhuin, P.S. Sarankul in the district of Nayagarh the Sub-Inspector of Excise (Mobile), Nayagarh (P.W. 4) accompanied by his staff and Executive Magistrate and A.P.R. Force went to the village and conducted raids. He could detect cultivation of hemp plants by many inhabitants of that village and the accused had cul...
Rajendra Kumar Bisoi Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-12-2000
Reported in: 90(2000)CLT527; 2000(II)OLR417
L. Mohapatra, J.1. The petitioner in this writ application has challenged the order of removal from service pursuant to a disciplinary proceeding as well as the order passed by the appellate authority rejecting the appeal.2. The petitioner while working as a Constable in the Central industrial Security Force ('CISF' for short) was on duty on 9.11.1995 under opposite party No.3 and was detained for patrolling duty in 'B' shift from 13.00 his to 21.00 hrs. During the duty period at about 20.30 hrs there was an attempt for theft inside the plant premises by 5 to 6 criminals and it was noticed by some Constables on duty. The petitioner as well as one Suresh Kumar fired one round each, as a result of which the criminal fled away except one Gobei Majhi who was caught by the security personnel. On interrogation, the said Gobei Majhi stated that the criminals had been allowed by the petitioner to enter inside the premises by scaling over the wall and in a T.I. parade conduct then and there, th...
Bhubaneswar Chhatria Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-12-2000
Reported in: 2000(II)OLR564
L. Mohaptra, J.1. The petitioner in this writ application has challenged the order of removal from service pursuant to a disciplinary proceeding and the order passed by the appellate authority rejecting the appeal. 2. The petitioner while working as Constable, C.I.S.F. at Paradip Port was served with a memorandum of charges dated 29.5.1996. The charges are as follows : 'No. 852280197 Const. B. Chhatria of CISF Unit PPT Paradip is charged for gross misconduct in that the said No. 852280197 Const. B. Chhatria was detailed for 'A' shift duty at Gate No. 3 from 0500 hrs. to 1300 hrs. on 16.5.1996. The said No. 852280197 Const. B. Chhatria while on duty collected money illegally from 3 truck drivers at the rate of Rs. 5/- per truck loaded with coal and care food as disclosed by the truck drivers at Atharbanki gate in front of Inspector R.P.Gangopadhyay, ASI/Ex-K.R.K. Dora. ASI/F.A. Rama Rao and Ct. N.Samal. The above act on the part of No. 852280197 Const. B. Chhatria amounts to gross misco...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »