Orissa Court March 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.
T. Rama Krishna Rao Vs. State of Orissa, Represented by the Secretary ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-21-2002
Reported in: 2002(II)OLR482
P.K. Balasubramanyan, C.J.1. The petitioner was the licensee of Koraput No. II IMFL 'OFF' shop for the excise year 2000-01. The petitioner got the renewal of his licence for the excise year 2001-02 commencing on 1.4.2001 and ending on 31.3.2002.2. The petitioner, in terms of the Orissa Excise (Exclusive Privilege) Foreign Liquor Rules, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Rules') had the obligation under Rule 6-A of the said Rules, to guarantee the sale of and to lift the minimum guaranteed quantity of foreign liquor as fixed by the Excise Commissioner. A minimum guaranteed quantity per month was fixed for the shop. For the months of April, May and June, 2001, the petitioner did not lift the minimum guaranteed quantity. He did not apply to the Collector for permission to lift the quota during the succeeding month in terms of Rule 6-A(2). He also did not lift it. In that .situation, the Superintendent of Excise, Koraput issued a notice to the petitioner dated 9.11.2001 calling upon the...
Aparti Sahu and anr. Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-21-2002
Reported in: 2002(II)OLR148
B. Panigrahi, J.1. This revision is directed against the order passed by the learned J.M.F.C., Ranpur in 2 (a) CC Case No. 44 of 1987 under Section 47(a) and (f) of the Bihar and Orissa Excise Act, whereby he held the petitioners guilty of having committed an offence under Section 47 (a) of Bihar and Orissa Excise Act and directed them to undergo R.I. for six months and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/- in default, to undergo further R.I. for a period of one month, which was affirmed by the appellate Court in Crl. Appeal No. 41/128 of 1990-89.2. The brief history of the prosecution case is that on 9.8.1987 at about 9. P.M., the Excise S.I of Rampur on receiving reliable information about the illegal distillation of Liquor of 'Ghidighadia' hill-top near village Odapala proceeded to the spot alongwith his other staff and noticed the petitioners present there. The raiding party found 72 numbers of earthen pots each containing 20 litres of molasses, fertiliser wash and one earthen pot containing ...
Brundaban Sahu and anr. Vs. Padmabati Behera and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-20-2002
Reported in: 93(2002)CLT447
L. Mohapatra, J.1. The petitioners in this application Under Section 482 Cr.P.C. have challenged the legality and propriety of the orders dated 31.7.1996 and 6.8.1996 passed by the learned S.D.J.M., Chatrapur in G.R. Case No. 30 of 1996 entertaining a protest petition and directing for enquiry Under Section 202 Cr.P.C. The order dated 30.8.1996 is also challenged in which cognizance of offence Under Sections 452, 354, 380, 294/34 of the Penal Code has been taken.2. The case of the petitioners before this Court is that on the basis of an F.I.R. lodged by the opposite party No. 1 investigation was taken up and charge sheet was filed on 9.3.1996 for commission of offence Under Section 294/23 of the Penal Code. The petitioners appeared in the Court and were released on bail. While the matter stood thus on 31.7.1996 the informant filed a protest petition with a prayer to conduct an inquiry and to take cognizance for commission of offence Under Sections 452, 395, 354, 327, 341, 294/34 of the...
Madan Jena and anr. Vs. Saraswati Jena (Dead) After Her L.Rs. and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-20-2002
Reported in: AIR2003Ori14; 93(2002)CLT653
P.K. Tripathy, J. 1. This Second Appeal is against the concurrent judgments of the courts below, i.e., Munsif, Bhubaneswar in O.S. No. 31 of 1981 and Additional District Judge, Bhubaneswar in Title Appeal No. 5/ 5 of 1983/82 granting decree both of mandatory and perpetual injunction of the basis of the prayer made by the plaintiff in her suit. Admittedly, the defendants 1 and 3 are the co-owners or plaintiffs and therefore, after hearing the appellant the substantial question of law involved in the appeal was framed as follows : 'Whether a house constructed by a co-sharer on a homestead which is joint would be sufficient for relief of permanent injunction against another co-sharer who disturbs the possession of the pfaintiff-co-sharer ?' 2. Late Kshetrabasi Jena is a co-owner with the defendants and all of them are agents. Plaintiff No. 1 is the widow and the other plaintiffs are the children of late Kshetrabasi and plaintiff No. 1. The plot under Khata No. 294 which includes plot No. ...
Biranchi Narayan Dash Vs. Tyre Corporation of India Ltd.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-20-2002
Reported in: I(2005)BC47; 94(2002)CLT401; [2004]121CompCas664(Orissa)
B.P. Das, J.1. The petitioner in this application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has prayed for quashing the order dated 18.7.1995 passed by the S.D.J.M., Sadar, Cuttack, in I.C.C. No. 90 of 1995 taking cognizance against him under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (in short 'the Act'). It is worthwhile to mention here that the petitioner has approached this Court after his application dated 19.2.1999 praying for recalling the order taking cognizance was rejected by the learned S.D.J.M. by order dated 12.5.1999.2. The brief facts leading to the present proceeding, as borne out from the complaint petition, are as follows :Tyre Corporation of India Ltd. is a Govt. of India Enterprise dealing with automobile tyres and tubes, having its registered office at Calcutta, through its various branch offices all over the country and one of such branch offices is situated at Cuttack. On the basisof the requisitions made by the petitioner, hereinafter called t...
Narendranath Das Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-20-2002
Reported in: 2002(II)OLR47
B.P. Das, J.1. This appeal is directed against an order passed by the learned Special Judge, Bhubaneswar in T. R. Case No. 16 of 1985 convicting the appellant for the offences punishable under Section 161 of the I.P.C. and Section 5(1)(d) read with Section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 (here-in-after referred to as the 'Act') and sentencing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/- in default, to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for six months under Section 5(1)(d) read with Section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. However, considering the ingredient of Section 161, I.P.C. and parallel provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act, no separate sentence has been awarded.2. The case of the prosecution in short is as follows :The appellant was a public servant and while posted as the Officer-in-charge of Gangapur Police Station, in the district of Ganjam, on 18.10.1983, at about 10. P.M., he found that one Simachal Bis...
Budu Hontal Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-20-2002
Reported in: 2002(I)OLR516
B. Panigrahi, J.1. This appeal assails the judgment and order dated 11.07.1995 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jeypore, in Sessions Case No. 80 of 1994 (S.C. No. 297/94 of Sessions Judge, Jeypore), convicting the appellant under Section 302, IPC and sentencing him to undergo imprisonment for life.2. Shorn of unnecessary details, the prosecution case is that 6 to 7 days preceding the date of incident, the appellant's wife had gone to her father's house as the appellant was quarreling with her frequently. As such, the appellant was staying in his house with his three children. In the night of 25/26.05.1994, he slept in the house along with his children after bolting the door from inside. At about 3.00 A.M., Ramachandra Hontal (P.W.3), the son of the appellant, heard some noise which aroused him from the sleep. He noticed that the appellant stabbed knife blows on the neck of his sister Lalita (daughter of the appellant) which caused her instantaneous death. At about dawn ...
Santosh Kumar Singh Vs. Ranjana Kumari Singh
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-19-2002
Reported in: 93(2002)CLT529; 2002(I)OLR489
P.K.Tripathy, J.1. Learned counsel for the petitioner produced xerox copy of the petition (pleadings) and xerox copy of the written statement. True copy has been attested by the learned counsel. Learned counsel for the opposite party does not dispute to authenticity of those documents.2. Heard.3. This Civil Revision is disposed of at the stage of admission on consent of both the parties and after hearing them at length.4. The dispute between the parties is relating to existence and continuance of marital relationship which is subject matter of adjudication in Civil Proceeding No. 188 of 2000 pending in the court of Judge, Family Court, Rourkela. Opposite party has sought for a decree of declaration that she is the legally married wife of the petitioner. She has also prayed for an order of injunction prohibiting the petitioner to marry one Rita Singh who has been described as opposite party No. 2 in that proceeding. Opposite party instituted the above Civil Proceeding and advanced a cas...
Management of Peerless General Finance and Investment Co. Ltd. and anr ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-18-2002
Reported in: 93(2002)CLT534; [2002(95)FLR939]
L. Mohapatra, J. This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing criminal proceeding in 2(c) C.C. No. 126 of 1996 pending in the Court of the learned S.D.J.M. (Sadar), Cuttack as well as the order taking cognizance dated 30.4.96 for the offence under Section 29 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.2. Facts giving rise to the case are that one Priya Ranjan Mishra working as a Sub-staff in the Cuttack Branch Office of M/s. Peerless General Finance and Investment Company Ltd. (petitioner) was terminated from service with effect from 1.12.81 and dispute with regard to termination was referred to Industrial Tribunal Orissa for adjudication vide Industrial Dispute Case No. 46 of 1983. In the said Industrial Dispute case the award was passed on 30.5.1988 holding the termination to be illegal and unjustified and the Tribunal in the said award directed the following :'The refusal of employment to the third-party workman which amounted to termination of his service by the ...
Smt. Jayanti Mohapatra Vs. Sri Narayan Mohanty and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-18-2002
Reported in: 93(2002)CLT721; 2002(I)OLR416
L. Mohapatra, J. 1. This application under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. has been filed challenging the order dated 4.3.1997 of the learned Sessions Judge, Balasore in Criminal Revision No. 78 of 1996 setting aside the order dated 27.1.96 passed by the learned S.D.J.M., Balasore in I.C.C. No. 401 of 1995 taking cognizance of offence under Section 354 of the Penal Code.2. From the record as it appears that the complaint case was filed by the present petitioner alleging therein that in the night of 1/2-10.95 the opposite party No. 1 along with some subordinate police officers came in a police jeep broke open the door of the house of the petitioner's husband with a plough. Out of fear the husband of the complainant as well as father-in-law did not open the door and while breaking open the door with plough the same hit the father-in-law of the complainant. Thereafter, they dragged them to the house of Aparti Sahoo where the complainant and her husband's sister were staying to see Durga Puja f...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »