Orissa Court December 2001 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.
Dava Gram Panchayat Represented Through Its Sarpanch, Mitrabhanu Sahu ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Dec-11-2001
Reported in: 2002(I)OLR161
P.K. Balasubramanyan, C.J.1. The petitioner in this petition has challenged the order dated 3.8.1999 passed by the Orissa Administrative Tribunal. Cuttack Bench as contained at Annexure-8 on a motion made before it by opposite party No. 1, who was Secretary of Dava Gram Panchayat. The order was passed by the Tribunal even without notice to the Grama Panchayat. By that order the Tribunal directed the District Magistrate and Collector, Bargarh to see that his instructions by letter dated 21.8.1998 are carried out within a fortnight of receipt of a copy of that order.The District Magistrate and Collector in his turn issued a letter on 27.8.1999 as contained at Annexure-9 to the Grama Panchayat intimating it of the direction of the Tribunal.2. The Grama Panchayat kept opposite party No. 1 under suspension on the allegation that there were grave charges against him, and in dereliction of his duty as Secretary of the Grama ' Panchayat, he acted in a manner prejudicial to the interests of the...
Bhinga Rana Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Dec-10-2001
Reported in: 2002(I)OLR155
ORDERP.K. Tripathy, J.1. In this application under Section 482, Cr. P.C. the substantial prayer of the petitioner is to quash the order of issue of process against him by learned S.D.J.M., Dharmagarh in G. R. Case No. 494 of 1999 on the ground that though the charge-sheet is filed for the offence under Sections 294, 323, 324, 307/34, IPC, petitioner was not named as an offender in the charge-sheet and notwithstanding that learned S.D.J.M. exceeding the power and jurisdiction vested in him issued process against the petitioner.2. Learned counsel for the petitioner in course of his prolonged argument filed a memo of citation of large number of cases and after placing a few out of that he became conscious that the legal issue which is to be considered in this Court is short and single. Thus, he has placed reliance on the case of Raj Kishore Prasad v. State of Bihar and Anr., AIR 1996 SC 1931; Ranjit Singh v. State of Punjab, (1998) 15 OCR (SC) 476; and Kishori Singh and Ors. v. State of B...
Smt. V. Puspanjali Raju Vs. State of Orissa, Represented by Secretary, ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Dec-10-2001
Reported in: 2002(I)OLR227
P.K. Balasubramanyan, C.J.1. When Misc. Case No. 13627 of 2001 was listed for further orders, and Misc. Case Nos. 15082 and 15510 of 2001 were listed for vacation of stay, with consent of learned counsel for parties the main writ petition was taken up for final hearing and the same is disposed of by this judgment.2. The petitioner was elected as the Chairperson of Notified Area Council, Digapahandi in the district of Ganjam. She assumed the office of Chairperson on 19.7.1997. The Council consists of 11 members. On 27.7.2001, 8 of the councillors forwarded a no confidence motion against the Chairperson, the present petitioner, to the District Magistrate. The District Magistrate issued notice of the meeting to be held for considering the no confidence motion under Section 54 of the Orissa Municipal Act, 1950 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'). The said notice was issued on 1.8.2001 and the meeting was held on 6.8.2001 in which the petitioner also participated. The no confidence motio...
Krutibash Mohanty Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Dec-06-2001
Reported in: 93(2002)CLT273
P.K. Patra, J. 1. In this writ application under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 17.9.1998 in O.A.No. 773 of 1997 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Cuttack Bench, Cuttack, rejecting his prayer for giving him retrospective promotion and financial benefits. 2. The petitioner was recruited as a Senior Observer on 22.4.1974 and was posted in the office of the Deputy Director General of Meteorology in the Regional Meteorological Centre, Calcutta (opposite party No. 3) which is under the Director General of Meteorology India Meteology Department, New Delhi (opposite party No. 2). On 8.3.1983 the petitioner was promoted to the post of Scientific Assistant in the scale of pay of Rs. 1400-2300.00. As per the gradation list of Scientific Assistants in the Department published on 11.7.1988, vide Annexure-1, the petitioner was placed at serial number 1386 and one Amarjit Singh was placed next below him at serial number 1...
Usha Sinha Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Dec-05-2001
Reported in: 93(2002)CLT278; 2002(I)OLR262
R.K. Patra, A.C.J. 1. The aforesaid application has been filed on behalf of the prosecution (Vigilance Department) seeking clarification of the judgment dated 14.8.2001 rendered by one of us (L. Mohapatra, J.) in Criminl Misc. Case No. 3657 of 2001). While considering the same, it was brought to our notice that a learned Single Judge of this Court in Sadhu Charan Meher v. State of Orissa, 2001(21) OCR 353 has held that offences under the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 are bailable. As the aforesaid view was doubted, we have examined the entire matter and would deal with the same hereinafter.2. A. Clarification of the Judgment dated 14.8.2001 (supra)Criminal Misc. Case No. 3657 of 2001 was an application made under Section 482, Cr.P.C. by which cognizance taken by the Special Judge, Bolangir under sections 7, 8, 9 and 10 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as the Principal Act) was challenged by the petitioner Usha Sinha on the ground that he (special Judge)...
President, Sikh Gurudwara, Bhawanipatna Vs. Rajkishore Panda
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Dec-04-2001
Reported in: 93(2002)CLT284; 2002(I)OLR231
L. Mohapatra, J. 1. The application of defendant No. 1 under Order 9, Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC, for short) for setting aside the ex parte decree having been rejected and the appeal filed against the said order having been dismissed, the present revision has been filed.2. The opposite party had filed a suit in the court of the learned Munsif, Dharamgarh, for declaration of right, title and interest over the suit land. The short case of the opposite party is that the suit land originally belonged to Gurudwara, Bhawanipatna, and was under the custody of defendant No. 2 Ujagar Singh who was the Presidentof the Sikh Gurudwara. Since the land was located at a long distance from the headquarters of the Gurudwara at Bhawanipatna and it was difficult on the part of the Gurudwara to look after the property, same was sold in favour of Chandrabhanu, Krushna and the plaintiff-opposite party for a consideration of Rs. 3,600/- and possession was delivered. Mutation was allowed in t...
Chandrakala Domb Vs. Master Domb and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Dec-04-2001
Reported in: 93(2002)CLT24; 2002(I)OLR136
L. Mohapatra, J.1. This appeal has been filed challenging the judgment and decree passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Nuapada confirming the judgment and decree passed by the learned Sub-Judge, Nuapada in T.S. No. 53 of 1990.2. Appellant was the defendant No. 3 in the trial court. The suit had been filed for issuance of perpetual injunction restraining defendants 1 to 3 from entering upon Schedule 'A' lands and alternatively for partition of Schedule 'B' land and for a direction to allot 'A' schedule land to the share of the plaintiff-respondent No. 1. From the order and decree passed by the trial court it appears that the original respondent No. 1 Master Domb had filed an application under Order 23, Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure with a prayer to allow him to withdraw the suit against the present appellant who was defendant No. 3 in the trial Court. Said prayer was allowed and the suit was disposed of on compromise. Present appellant against whom the suit had been ...
The Nayabati and ors. Vs. Sanghamitra Sahoo and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Dec-04-2001
Reported in: 93(2002)CLT20; 2002(I)OLR282
L. Mohapatra, J. 1. The order dated 20.10.2001 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division) 2nd (sic.) Court, Cuttack rejecting the prayer of the defendant-petitioner for amendment of the written statement is under challenge before this Court in this revision.2. The opposite party has filed the suit claiming damages to the tune of Rs. 1,50,000/- against defendant-petitioner for defamatory publication made in their local daily 'The Nayabati' against the plaintiff-opposite party. A further prayer has also been made in the suit to restrain the defendants permanently from publishing any news item against the plaintiff in the paper publishing by them.3. The allegations of the plaintiff-opposite party is that in 24.10.97 edition of the defendants publication, namely 'The Nayabati', a new item was published with the heading'Mahadevanka Ghara Ghauda'. Under the said heading a small article was published making some allegations against the plaintiff-opposite party. In the written stateme...
Gopal Krushna Mohapatra Vs. Canara Bank
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Dec-04-2001
Reported in: 93(2002)CLT33; 2002(I)OLR220
L. Mohapatra, J. 1. The application of the petitioner for setting aside the ex parte decree having been rejected and the same having been confirmed in appeal, this revision has been filed.2. The opposite party had filed the suit - M.S. No. 42 of 1996 against the petitioner in the court of the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Bhanjanagar, for realisation of Rs. 14,378.75 with pendentelite and future interest. The petitioner who is an Advocate did not file his written statement after some adjournments, as a result of which he was set ex parte on 2.9.1998 on 3.9.1998 the suit was taken up for ex parte hearing and the ex parte decree was passed on 10.9.1998. After ex parte decree was passed, the petitioner filed an application under Order 9, Rule 13, C.PC. for setting aside the same. In the application the petitioner stated that his wife was suffering seriously since 1.9.1998 and since he was busy rendering medical assistance to his wife, being the sole male member of the family, he ...
Anil Kumar Samartha Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Dec-04-2001
Reported in: 2002CriLJ1194
ORDERL. Mohapatra, J.1. The petitioner who is alleged to have involved himself in an offence under Section 376(2)(g) read with Section 457 of the Indian Penal Code has approached this Court in this application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of bail.2. F.I.R. has been lodged by the victim lady on 18-7-2001, stating that she had married one Saheb Badtia in the year 1996 and a son was born out of the marriage. Thereafter she left her husband and stayed in her parents' house and was working in Magnum factory as a labourer. She has also stated in the F.I.R. that since June she is staying in a rented house in Lingaraj Nagar and after closure of the factory she was unemployed and working as a maid-servant in the house of accused-Bulu Kar. At about 10.30 p.m. on 31-7-2001 one Deba Choudhary forcibly entered into her room and committed rape on her. Thereafter, Bulu Kar in whose house she was serving as maidservant and two others in the age group of 25 to 26 years ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »