Orissa Court August 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.
Dayanidhi Nayak Vs. State of Orissa and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-31-2001
Reported in: 92(2001)CLT673; 2002CriLJ371; 2001(II)OLR394
A.S. Naidu, J.1. This application has been filed invoking jurisdiction under Section 482, Cr. P. C., inter alia, praying to quash further proceeding in G.R, Case No. 117 of 1998 corregpond-ing to Jharpokharia P. S. Case No. 11 of 1998, pending before the learned S. D, J. M., Baripada. It appears that on the basis of an F. I. R. lodged by one Subasini Nayak - opp. party No. 2, Jharpokharia P. S. case No. 11 of 1998 was initiated under Section 493, I. F. C. against the petitioner.2. The moot point which needs determination in the present case is whether accepting the allegations levelled in the F. I. R. and other materials on record, prima facie case under Section 493. I. P. C. is made out against the petitioner. For better appreciation of the correct facts, narrations made in the F. I. R. are stated herein below,It is alleged by Subasini Nayak, the informant, that she along with her father and mother were working in the house of Dayanidhi Nayak as domestic help. Dayanidhi promised to ma...
Akshaya Pradhan @ Akshaya Kumar Pradhan Vs. Ashamoni Behera and 4 ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-30-2001
Reported in: 92(2001)CLT593
B. Panigrahi, J.1. This revision application filed by the plaintiff has assailed the order passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Baripada in T. S. No. 63 of 1993 whereby he refused the prayer for amendment sought by the petitioner.2. The plaintiff has filed a suit for declaration of his title in respect of two buses and for direction to the defendants 2 & 3 to record the name of the plaintiff as owner in respect of those buses in the R. C. Book and for permanent injunction restraining the defendant Nos. 1 and 5 from transferring the ownership of the buses.3. The case in nutshell as revealed from the revision application is that defendant No.l executed a power-of-attorney in favour of defendant No. 5, her son, for plying the two buses and to manage the affairs of those buses on her behalf. The further case is that the defendant No. 1 intended to sell those two buses which were in a dis-repaited condition. The terms and conditions settled between them for the sale stipulat...
Collector-cum-l.A. Officer Vs. Santosh Kumar Sahu and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-30-2001
Reported in: 2001(II)OLR414
B. Panigrahi, J.1. The appeal filed by the State Under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (in short, the 'Act') challenges the decision of the Subordinate Judge, Nawapara, in M.J.C. No. 55 of 1992, directing the appellant to pay higher compensation to the claimant-respondent No. 1 in respect of the acquired land.2. Ac. 2.24 decimals of land appertaining to Plot No. 118, Khata No. 6 of Mouza Sirtol, P. S - Nawapara in the district of Kalahandi was acquired for the purpose of construction of Office building and Staff quarters for Kalahandi Irrigation Sub-Division, under Notification No. 16540 dated 24.3.1972 issued Under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act and declaration was published on 28.12.1973. The Land Acquisition Officer fixed compensation of Rs. 4,336.24 paise which was received by the claimant-respondent No. 1 under protest. On objection being filed, the matter was referred to the Subordinate Judge Under Section 18 of the Act for determination of just compensatio...
Baladev Raj Agarwal Alias Baldev Agarwal Vs. State Bank of India and o ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-29-2001
Reported in: IV(2004)BC416; 92(2001)CLT779; 2001(II)OLR398
B. Panigrahi, J.1. This appeal assails the propriety of the judgment and decree passed in Money Suit No. 66 of 1988 of the Court of the Subordinate Judge, Balangir.2. The respondent-State Bank of India had advanced anamount of Rs. 98,000/- to the appellant as medium term loan forpurchasing a truck. The defendant-appellant as well as, theguarantor agreed to repay the loan to the State Bank of India in36 instalments at the rate of Rs. 2.750/- per mensem along withinterest at the rate of 13 per cent per annum with quarterly rest.But the appellant as well as the guarantor did not repay themoney, in the meanwhile, plaintiff-Bank allowed the claim to bebarred by limitation. After the claim was barred by limitation,the appellant approached the Bank for executing a deed of acknowledgment in their favour and on the basis of the deed of acknowledgment, the plaintiff-respondent filed the suit for recovery ofRs. 2,15,645.84 p. 3. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant has contended that s...
Sania Patra Vs. State of Orissa and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-29-2001
Reported in: 2001(II)OLR410
L. Mohapatra, J.1. This writ application has been filed for quashing the settlement of Fishery Sairat, namely, Purunagada Bandha located under Badngada Grama Panchayat, in favour of opposite party No. 7 and foi further direction to settle the Sairat in favour of the petitioner.2. Case of the petitioner is that for the year 2000-2001 a notice was given by the Grama Panchayat authorities for settlement of Purunagada Bandha and bids were invited. The petitioner along with others participated in the said bid and the amount offered by the petitioner was the second highest. The petitioner offered Rs. 25,000/-, whereas one Surya Narayan Panigrahi offered Rs. 25,050/- Since the highest bidder Surya Narayan Panigrahi expressed his inability to deposit the entire amount at a time and his prayer for instalment was refused, a second auction was conducted. In the second auction the Sairat has been settled in favour of opposite party No. 7 for consecutively three years starting from 2000-2001 till 2...
Nabakishore Panda and ors. Vs. State of Orissa and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-28-2001
Reported in: 2001(II)OLR402
P.K. Tripathy, J.1. In this application Under Section 482, of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short, 'the Code'), the accused persons in I.C.C. No. 46 of 2000 of the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class, Basudevpur, have prayed to quash the order dated 6.4.2000 by which learned J.M.F.C. after taking cognizance of the offences Under Section 448, 323, 506, 307/34, I.P.C. has issued process of appearance of the accused persons.2. Learned counsel for the petitioners argued that after institution of the complaint in the Court of S.D.J.M., Bhadrak. learned S.D.J.M. called for a report from the O.I.C., Basudevpur P.S. in accordance with the provision in Section 210 of the Code. Shortly thereafter the Court of J.M.F.C, Basudevpur being established the complaint was transferred to that Court on the ground of territorial jurisdiction. Learned counsel for the petitioners stated that learned J.M.F.C. without waiting for the report from the police, decided to conduct an enquiry Under S...
Anil Kumar Panda Vs. State of Orissa and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-28-2001
Reported in: 2001CriLJ4359; 2001(II)OLR435
P.K. Tripathy, J.1. This application Under Section 482 of the Code Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short the 'Code') has been filed .by the petitioner who is accused in G. R. Case No. 42 of 1996 in the Court of S.D.J.M., Baripada. Application filed by the petitioner with his wife (informant)/opposite party No. 2) to compound the offence Under Section 498A, I.P.C., was turned down by learned S.D.J.M. on May 9, 2000 on the ground that such offence is not compoundable.Petitioner thus prays to quash the proceeding i.e., G. R. Case No. 42 of 1996 on the ground that in view of the compromise between the petitioner and opposite party No. 2 continuance of the proceeding is an abuse of the process of the Court.2. Admittedly, petitioner is the husband and opposite party No. 2 (informant in the G.R.Case Case) is his wife and State of Orissa i.e., opposite party No. 1 is the prosecutor. On the basis of the allegations made by opposite party No. 2 regarding demand of dowry and ill-treatment and tortur...
Dillip Kumar Ray Vs. Tata Finance Ltd.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-27-2001
Reported in: 92(2001)CLT539; 2001(II)OLR425
B. Panigrahi, J. 1. This revision has assailed the judgment/ order dated 26th April, 2000 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Bhubaneswar in Misc. Appeal No. 3/9 of 1999 setting aside the judgment/order passed by the learned 'Civil Judge (Junior Division), Bhubaneswar in Misc. Case No. 251 of 1998 on an application under Order 39, Rules 1 & 2, C. P. C. 2. The factual matrix leading to this revisional application is as follows : The revisionist/plaintiff had purchased a Tata Estate Car bearing Registration No. OR-02-D-0021 from the defendant-opp. party on the basis of a hire purchase agreement. It was stipulated in the agreement that the plaintiff will repay the price of the car to the opp. party in monthly instalments. It is alleged that while advancing loan, the defendant-opposite party had taken signatures of the plaintiff on a printed form with blank spaces and utilised the same against the plaintiff without letting him know about the terms of the agreement even on repe...
Kailash Nath Mohanty Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-27-2001
Reported in: 2001(II)OLR482; [2002]126STC79(Orissa)
R.K. Patra, J.1. On the basis of reference made by the Orissa Sales Tax Tribunal (in brief 'Tribunal'), the matter was registered as S.J.C. No. 61 of 1995. Following the amendment to Section 24 of the Orissa Sales Tax Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), the said reference has been converted to tax revision and that is how it has come before us for disposal.2. The Tribunal referred the following question for opinion of this Court :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee is entitled to any relief of adjustment with respect of the taxes already paid by him on the transactions of purchase in a proceeding under, Section 12(5) of the Orissa Sales Tax Act, if the dealer was found to be liable under the Act prior to grant of registration certificate ?'3. Upon hearing the counsel for parties and on perusal of the relevant orders passed by the authorities under the Act, the question really arises for consideration is, whether the assessments are li...
Land Acquisition Officer, Civil Vs. Bachha Sethi
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-24-2001
Reported in: 2001(II)OLR578
B. Panigrahi, J.1. This First Appeal has assailed the propriety of the award passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Kendrapara, in L. A. Case No. 112 of 1986 in a reference Under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (in short, the 'Act').2. Land appertaining to Khata No. 88, Plot No. 261 measuring Ac. 0. 12 decimals and Khata No. 90, Plot No. 262 measuring Ac. 0. 68 decimals, in total Ac. 0. 80 decimals in mouza Sribantapur in Kendrapara P.S. belonging to the respondent was acquired by the State Government for construction of Drainage Channel from Dhumatapat to Gobari river and possession was taken on 29.1 J. 1978. The Land Acquisition Collector awarded compensation of Rs. 1536.40 paise for the acquired land. The claimant being dissatisfied filed objection on 18.4.1979 before the Collector claiming higher compensation at the rate of Rs. 10,000/- per acre although he received the compensation amount under protest on 24.3.1979. The Collector referred the matter Unde...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »