Orissa Court March 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.
Gauri Bewa and Others Vs. Parsuram Biswal and Others
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-26-2001
Reported in: 92(2001)CLT15
P.K. Misra, J. 1. Defendant No. 3 and the legal representatives of defendant No. 2 are the appellants against a final decree proceeding. The facts giving rise to the present appeal are as follows :--A preliminary decree was passed on 8-3-1976 in which the original plaintiff got 1/9th share and defendants 1 and 2 each got 4/9th share. A final decree proceeding was initiated and the possession was delivered. On 12-12-1979 the original plaintiff sold Ac. 0. 92 decimals of land from Plot Nos. 505 and 362 to present respondent No. 1. Defendant No. 3 had filed Civil Revision No. 375 of 1981 in the High Court wherein it was held that the original plaintiff and defendants 1 and 2 were entitled to 1/6th share each. On the basis of the aforesaid revised preliminary decree, a fresh final decree proceeding was initiated. The present respondent No. 1, a purchaser from the original plaintiff, got himself impleaded in the final decree proceeding. The trial court by order dated 22-12-1989 gave a fresh...
Judhistir Naik and Others Vs. Golekha Chandra Lenka and Others
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-26-2001
Reported in: 91(2001)CLT725
P.K. Misra, J.1. Plaintiffs are the appellants against a confirming decision. There is no dispute that the disputed property originally belonged to one Rodani Bewa. The plaintiffs claim that plaintiff No. 2, father of plaintiff No. 1 and the father of plaintiff Nos. 3 to 7 had purchased the disputed property from Rodani Bewa by a registered sale deed dated 9-4-1949. Subsequently, the father of plaintiff No. 1 transferred his one-third interest in favour of plaintiff No. 1 on 17-8-1962 and plaintiff No. 1 thus possessed the disputed property along with plaintiff No. 2 and the father of plaintiffs 3 to 7, In the year 1974, the defendants threatened to dispossess them on the ground that they had purchased the property from Rodani Bewa on 8-4-1969. It is claimed that the subsequent sale deed is nor binding on the plaintiffs. It is further claimed that the plaintiffs had given their sale deed to the Amin during the settlement proceeding and the sale deed was lost.2. Defendants 1, 2, 3, 5, 6...
Gokul Chandra Kanungo Vs. State of Orissa and Others
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-26-2001
Reported in: 2001(I)OLR583
P.K. Misra, J.1. The recalcitrant attitude of opposite parties in the face of decision of the Civil Court has given rise to the fifing of the present writ application seeking for a direction to the opposite parties to hand over the possession of the disputed land and building as described in the writ application and to pay Rs. 30,000/- towards maintenance and repair charges and Rs. 80,512/- towards illegal occupation of the house and further pay at the rate of Rs. 544/- per month till the actual eviction.2. It is not necessary to notice the long history in this case. Suffice it to say that the petitioner had purchased the disputed house and the land from the previous owner Satrughna Malla in the year 1954 and subsequently, he had filed Title Suit No. 165 of 1961 for title and recovery of possession. While declaring the title of the petitioner and directing recovery of possession, the trial court also injuncted the Tahsildar, Kujang, and the State of Orissa from disturbing the petitione...
Sasidhar Naik (Died), Kuber Naik and Others Vs. PulIn Chandra Naik and ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-26-2001
Reported in: 92(2001)CLT333; 2001(I)OLR559
P.K. Misra, J.1. Defendants 1 and 4 are the appellants, against a reversing decision in' a' suit for declaration of title and recovery of possession. The genealogy indicating the relationship is as follows :-- Late Mukundram Naik | ---------------------------------------------- | | | | Late Gopal Late Bhisma Sashidhar Sradharkar | | (D-1) (D-4) -------------------- ----------------- | | | | Late Durbadal Lalmoni Minaketan Indubhusah (plaff.2) (D-2) (D-3) | Pulin (Plaff-1)2. The plaintiffs' case is as follows :Indubhusan, the father of plaintiff No. 1, obtained a reclamation Hukumnama on 27-2-1944 in respect of disputed 'A' Schedule property and he and his younger brother, plaintiff No. 2, reclaimed the same and continued in possession. During the Current Settlement Operation, the disputed lands were recorded in the name of the State of Orissa and only in respect of Ac.0. 52decimals of land possession, was recorded in favour of the plaintiffs. It is claimed that taking advantage of the ...
Pradyut Kumar Mohanty Vs. Dilip Singh Meheta
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-26-2001
Reported in: 92(2001)CLT378; 2001CriLJ2322; 2001(I)OLR607
ORDER1. Learned counsel for the opposite patty files the certified copy of the complaint, initial statement and the ordersheets in I. C. C. No. 66 of 1999 of the court of S. D. J. M., Panposh at Uditnagar, Rourkela.2. Heard further argument and the application u/s. 482, Cr. P. C. is disposed of in the following manner at the stage of hearing on admission.3. The undisputed fact is that petitioner is the accused No. 2 and opposite party is the complainant in I. C. C. No. 66 of 1999. The complainant instituted the said proceeding with the allegation of commission of the offence u/s. 138, Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881 (in short the 'Act') by the petitioner with respect to two cheques totally amounting to Rs. 2,80,000/- (Two lakhs and eighty thousand). According to the averment in the complaint and the initial statement of the complainant the said two cheques issued by the accused No. 2 on behalf the Company i. e. accused No. 1 were presented for payment in the concerned bank on 4-3-1999 ...
Smt. Manjubala Pattanayak Vs. State of Orissa and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-26-2001
Reported in: 2001(I)OLR530
P.K. Misra, J.1. The petitioner has prayed for quashing the orders under Annexures 1, 2 and 3 and for a direction to the opp. parties to mutate the name of the petitioner.2. One acre of land pertaining to Plot No. 516 in Khata No. 492 was settled with one Champakballari Das in Lease Case No. 548 of 1979. The aforesaid Champakballari Das applied for permission Under Section 6-A( I ) of the Orissa Land Reforms Act (in short, the 'O.L.R. Act') for alienation of the property and subsequently after obtaining the permission sold the disputed property to the petitioner by registered sale deed dated 23.2.1982. Thereafter, the petitioner filed an application before the Addl. Tahsildar for mutating the land in her favour. The said application was rejected on the ground that the order of lease had been set aside by the Addl. District Magistrate, Bhubaneswar, in Revision Case No. 45 of 1981. Thereafter, the petitioner filed Title Suit No. 177 of 1982 before the Subordinate Judge, Bhubaneswar, impl...
Divisional Manager, Boudh Commercial Division, Forest Development Corp ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-26-2001
Reported in: II(2001)ACC555; 2002ACJ1187; 2001(I)OLR533
P.K. Misra, J.1. This appeal Under Section 30 of the Workmen's Compensation Act (in short, the 'Act') has been filed by the employer . against the decision of the Commissioner For Workmen's Compensation, Cuttack (in short, the 'Commissioner'), directing payment of Rs. 1,85,170/ - with interest at the rate of 12 per cent per annum with effect from 18.6.1996.2. The claimant-respondents 1 to 4 are the dependent legal representatives of deceased Raj Kishore Barik who was admittedly working as a driver under the present appellant. While the deceased was driving a Jeep belonging to the appellant from Boudh to Bhubaneswar. there was an accident near Khandapara which ultimately resulted in the death of the deceased.3. The appellant in its original written statement while admitting about the death on account of accident in course of employment of the deceased had subsequently taken a plea by way of amendment of the written statement that the deceased met with the accident while he was proceedin...
Raghunath Mohanty Vs. Juti Dei
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-26-2001
Reported in: 2001(I)OLR555
P.K. Misra, J.1. Plaintiff is the appellant in F.A. No. 159/84. whereas the connected F.A. No. 195/84 has been filed by the defendant. The suit was filed for declaration of title and confirmation of possession. in the alternative, for recovery of possession. It was, claimed that the plaintiff was the adopted son of one Sankar Mohanty and, Labani Bewa and after the death of Sankar, Labani Bewa had executed a deed of gift in favour of the plaintiff, but subsequently, the aforesaid Labani Bewa again alienated the property in favour of the defendant by two registered sale deeds dated 17.1.1977 and 21.4.1977.2. The defendant in her written statement denied about the alleged adoption and the deed of gift stating that the said deed of gift had not been validly executed.3. On the aforesaid pleadings, the trial Court had framed several Issues. The main issue under issue Nos. 3 and 4 are as follows :'3. Whether the plaintiff is the adopted son of Sankar and Labani Bewa ?4. Whether the deed of gi...
Janaki Ballav Singh Vs. Management of Central Horticulture Experiment ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-26-2001
Reported in: 2001(I)OLR659
ORDERP.K. Misra, J.Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the opposite parties. The dispute was referred to the Industrial Tribunal on the following two aspects :-(i) Whether the action of the management of Central Horticulture Experiment Station, Bhubaneswar, in terminating Sh. J. B. Singh, Casual Workman is legal and justified '? If not, what relief the workman is entitled to ?(ii) Whether the action of management of Central Horticulture Experiment Station. Bhubaneswar in not paying the casual rates to the semi- skilled casual labours is legal and justified if not. what relief the workman is entitled ?The Tribunal found :'......Thus considering the evidence, both oral and documentary. I am inclined to hold that the termination of service of the second party in the manner it was effected is illegal and unjustified.....'In spite of such conclusion, the Tribunal instead of directing reinstatement of the petitioner, has passed an order under Issue No. 3 that...
Purusottam Singh Thakur Vs. State of Orissa and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-23-2001
Reported in: 2001(I)OLR438
ORDERP.K. Tripathy, J.1. Heard.2. In this application Under Section 482, Cr.P.C. petitioner prays to quash the order of cognizance in I.C.C. No. 26 of 1999 of the Court of J.M.F.C. Khariar.3. It appears from the order dated 18.12.1999 that in the said complaint after conducting an enquiry Under Section 202, Cr.P.C. learned J.M.F.C. took cognizance of the offences Under Sections 500/501, I.P.C. and issued process against the petitioner. Annexure-3 is the relevant publication wherein the petitioner has highlighted regarding the land reforms being over shadowed by the Gountias and influential persons in the helm of affairs so also the non-governmental organisations. In that connection. in one of the column name of the petitioner has been used as a Gountia as well as the executive of a non-governmental organisation. Therefore, opposite party No. 2/complainant thought that by such publication he has been defamed and accordingly filed the complaint.4. Learned counsel for the petitioner Mr. D...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »