Orissa Court January 2002 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.
State of Orissa Vs. Rabindranath Sahu
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-28-2002
Reported in: 93(2002)CLT571; 2002CriLJ2327; 2002(I)OLR309
P.K. Patra, J.1. This appeal against acquittal preferred by the State under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Act 2 of 1974) (hereinafter referred to as the 'CrPC') is directed against the judgment dated 26.8.1989 in Criminal Appeal No. 87 of 1988 passed by Shri D. Rama Rao, Second Addl. Sessions Judge, Cuttack acquitting the respondent (hereinafter referred to as 'the accused') of the charge under Sections 419 and 468 of the Indian Penal Code (for short 'IPC') reversing the judgment dated 28.6.1988 passed by Shri H. B. Das, Chief Judicial Magistrate, Cuttack in Vigilance G. R. Case No. 37 of 1982 convicting the accused of the said charge and sentencing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000.00 in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a further period of three months under the first count and to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000.00, in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment f...
Jagabandhu Enterprisers Vs. Central Electricity Supply Company of Oris ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-24-2002
Reported in: 93(2002)CLT321
B.P. Das, J. 1. The petitioner in this writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India calls in question the legality and validity of Annexure-13, i.e., the order dated 30.8.2001 passed by the Chief Executive Officer of Central Electricity Supply Company of Orissa Ltd. (in short 'the CESCO') in cancelling the work orders placed with the petitioner for supply of materials for diversion of 33 K.V. lines on 132 K.V. D/C. towers (Annexure-4) and for diversion of 33 K.V. Double Circuit line on 132 K.V. Double Circuit Towers at Jagatpur due to widening of N.H. No. 5 (Annexure-5) and directing recovery of the amount advanced from the petitioner by way of encashment of its bank guarantee, as well as Annexure-12, i.e., the order dated 31.8.2001 passed by the Executive Engineer, Cuttack Electrical Division,Cuttack of CESCO, pursuant to the order in Annexure-13. The petitioner also seeks a direction to the opposite parties to allow it to complete the works under the work ord...
Mukteswar Kak @ Ganda and anr. Vs. Radhamohan Sahu and After His Death ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-23-2002
Reported in: AIR2002Ori153; 93(2002)CLT421
P.K. Tripathy, J. 1. Appellants in Title Appeal No. 24 of 1979 of the Court of District Judge, Sundargarh who were Defendant Nos. 2 and 3 in Title Suit No. 29 of 1977 of the Court of Subordinate Judge, Sundargarh, presently described as Civil Judge (Senior Division) have preferred this Second Appeal as against the concurrent judgment and decree passed by the said two courts decreeing the plaintiff's suit for declaration of title, recovery of possession and mesne profit. During the pendency of this appeal as the plaintiff/Respondent No. 1 died, therefore, his sons have been substituted as the legal heirs as per order dt. 24.9.1997 passed by this Court. Defendants 1, 4 & 5 are respectively Respondent Nos. 2 to 4.2. Admittedly, the inter se relationship of the defendants is as follows:Mukteswar Kak V. Radhamohan SahuBasu Ganda(dead)_______________________________________________________________| | | |Samaru(dead) Santosh(dead) Kusa(dead) Manu(dead)| | | |Madhsudan(dead) Rushi(D.1) Bhagaba...
Uma Charan Mohanty Vs. Republic of India
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-23-2002
Reported in: 2002(I)OLR470
M. Papanna, J.1. This is an application under Section 389 of the Code of Criminal Procedure filed by the petitioner (appellant) seeking suspension of order of conviction and sentence passed by the learned Special Judge (CBI), Bhubaneswar in T.R. No. 45 of 1993 under Sections 7 and 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (in short 'the P.C. Act.')2. The petitioner was put up on trial before the learned Special Judge (CBI), Bhubaneswar on the accusation that during his incumbency as Branch Manager of Koraput Panchabati Grarnya Bank at Kenduguda during the year 1991 he demanded as well as accepted bribe of Rs. 900/- in total from the loanees such as Pitamber Lim, Dayanidhi Lima, Samuel Lima and Ghani Misal out of loan amount under I.R.D.A. Scheme implemented by the B.D.O., Padampur. After trial, the learned Special Judge (C.B.I.), by a judgment dt. 12.10.2001 convicted the petitioner under Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) of the P.C. Act a...
Sunil Kumar Pattanaik Vs. State of Orissa and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-18-2002
Reported in: 93(2002)CLT427
P.C. Naik, J. 1. The prayer in this writ application is for issuance of an appropriate writ, direction or order to the opposite parties commanding them to release the Grant-in-Aid in favour of the petitioner whose services have been validated in terms of the provisions contained in the Orissa Aided Educational Institutions (Appointment of Lecturers Validation) Act, 1998 (in short, 'Act, 1998'), Placing reliance on a decision of this Court in Sanjib Kumar Pattnaik v. State of Orissa and others (Batch), 2002 (I) OLR 58, it is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that once the appointment of the petitioners was validated under the statute, they were automatically entitled to receive Grant-in-Aid under the Orissa Grant-in-Aid Order, 1994(in short, 'Grant-in-Aid Order, 1994'). This, according to the learned counsel, flows from the provisions contained in Sub-section (2) of Section 3 of the Act, 1998 which lays down that lecturers whose appointments are validated under the Act...
Regional Director, E.S.i. Corporation Vs. P.B. Gupta
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-17-2002
Reported in: 93(2002)CLT495; [2002(93)FLR1147]; 2002(I)OLR250
P.K. Balasubramanyan, C.J. 1. This matter was listed for orders and on consent of the learned counsel for the parties, it was taken up for final disposal. Both sides were heard in detail. 2. What is challenged in this appeal is the order of the learned Single Judge in M.A. No. 438 of 1990. The question that arose for consideration before the learned Single Judge was, whether 'overtime allowance' paid to the employees would be included in the definition of 'wages' in Section 2(22) of the Employees State Insurance Act, 1948 for the purpose of the employer's contribution on the same. The learned Single Judge noticed that there was a sharp cleavage of opinion on the question, the High Courts of Calcutta, Karnataka and Rajasthan having taken the view that the said payment would not be included in the definition and the High Courts of Andhra Pradesh, Bombay, Kerala and Delhi having taken a contrary view. The learned Single Judge accepted the view taken by the High Courts of Calcutta, Karnata...
Debendra Kumar Dash Vs. State of Orissa and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-17-2002
Reported in: 94(2002)CLT177; 2002CriLJ2351; 2002(I)OLR510
B.P. Das, J. 1. Heard Shri Bijan Ray, learned Senior Advocate, and Shri S. P. Pradhan, Advocate, for the petitioner, and Shri Sisir Das, learned Addl. Govt. Advocate, for the State.The petitioner has filed the present application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short 'Cr.P.C.') with a prayer to quash the proceedings in G. R. Case No. 1213/2001 alleged to have been registered against him in the Court of the S.D.J.M., Puri, on the basis of the F.I.R. in Annexure-2, because previously an F.I.R. was lodged on the selfsame allegation on the basis of which G. R. Case No. 1218/2001 was registered in the same Court.2. According to the petitioner, the subsequent F.I.R. in respect of the selfsame occurrence is beyond the purview of Sections 154 and 156 of the Cr.P.C. Therefore, pendency of the second F.I.R. will cause undue harassment to the petitioner. According to the petitioner, the petitioner has been harassed and has suffered a lot due to the second F.I.R. as w...
Akapati Bhaskar Patro Vs. Trinath Sahu and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-17-2002
Reported in: 2002CriLJ3397
ORDERP.C. Naik, J.1. This Criminal Misc. Case filed under Section 482, Cr.P.C. is for setting aside the order dated 25-1-1994 passed by the 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Ganjam, Berhampur in Criminal Revision No. 75 of 1993 and for quashing the proceedings in I.C.C. No. 48 of 1992 pending before the S.D.J.M., Berhampur.2. Undisputedly, the petitioner is a tenant and the opposite party No. 1 is the owner-landlord in respect of the premises in question which is under occupation of the petitioner. There was some dispute between the petitioner and the opposite party No. 1 which, probably, ultimately led to issuance of notice under Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act determining the tenancy of the petitioner with effect from 31-5-1992 and asking him to vacate the premises on the said date failing which he would be treated as a trespasser.3. As the premises in question was not vacated it led to filing of a complaint before the S.D.J.M., Berhampur for prosecuting the petitioner-tenan...
Abhimanyu Sahu Vs. J. Krishnaveni Amma @ J. Krishnavani and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-16-2002
Reported in: 93(2002)CLT180; 2002(I)OLR267
P.K. Patra, J. 1. In this application under Sections 115 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure (for short CPC), the petitioner has prayed for setting aside the order dated 19.11.2001 passed by the District Judge, Ganjam-Gajapati, Berhampur in M.J.C. No. 16 of 2001 refusing to allow the prayer of the petitioner under Section 24 CPC to transfer Title Appeal No. 7 of 2000 pending before Shri A.C. Patnaik, Second Addl. District Judge, Berhampur to the court of the District Judge or any other court of Additional District Judge at Berhampur and to allow his prayer for transfer of the said Title Appeal to any other court. 2. The petitioner along with his parents (pro forma opposite party Nos. 7 and 8) was a plaintiff in Title Suit No. 58 of 1996 in the court of the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Berhampur in which they had prayed for declaration of their right, title and interest over the suit property and for permanent injunction. The suit was decreed in part. Being aggrieved ...
Sarojakanta Sahu Vs. State
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-16-2002
Reported in: 93(2002)CLT431
B.P. Das, J. 1. The appellant stood charged under Section 5(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act (in short 'the Act') punishable under Section 5(2) of the Act for obtaining pecuniary advantage for himself by use of corrupt and illegal means or abusing his official position as a public servant. He also stood charged under Section 161, I.P.C. for dishonestly accepting gratification other than legal remuneration with the motive for showing favour in exercise of his official functions as clerk.2. The facts leading to this appeal are briefly narrated hereunder:The accused was the Bench Clerk of the Tahasildar, Nuapara in the district of Kalahandi and was dealing with the ceiling case records. The complainant was a police officer attached to District Crime Intelligence Bureau, Sambalpur as A.S.I. His father had landed property in village Budhikomana and two other villages within the limits of Nuapada Tahasil. Ceiling Case No. 51 of 1979 was initiated against his father. He was noticed t...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »