Orissa Court June 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.
Fakir Singh Vs. Bijaya Kumar Bagaria
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jun-28-2002
Reported in: 94(2002)CLT295; 2002(II)OLR274
B.P. Das, J. 1. This application is directed against an order taking cognizance passed by the Judicial Magistrate, First Class (R), Cuttack in I.C.C. No. 42 of 1999 for the offence,under Section 394, Indian Penal Code (for short the 'I.P.C.'). In this regard the orders dated 2.8.1999 and 20.8.1999 are relevant. They are quoted hereunder ;'2.8-1999 : Complainant is present. Initial statement of the complainant is recorded. Cognizance is taken under Section 394, I.P.C. Call on 7.8.1999 for enquiry under Section 202, Cr.P.C.' '20.8.99. Complainant is present. Enquiry under Section 202, Cr.P.C. is closed. Perused the complaint petition, initial statement of the complainant and statement of witnesses recorded under Section 202, Cr.P.C. It is clearly revealed a case under Section 394, I.P.C. against the accused person named in the complaint petition. Cognizance of the said offence is already taken. There are also sufficient materials to proceed against the accused person. Complainant files p...
Saukat Ansari Vs. Asrafan Nesa and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jun-27-2002
Reported in: 2002(II)OLR291
Bimala Prasad Das, J.1. This revision is directed against the order dated 5th January, 2002 passed by the Additional District and Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court), Baripada in Succession Misc. Appeal No. 2/27 of 2001-97 upholding the order dated 3.10.97 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Karanjia in Succession Misc. Case No. 5/96 allowing the prayer of the applicant-Md. Nabi i.e., the predecessor-in-interest of the present opposite parties and directing to grant succession certificate in favour of the aforesaid applicant.2. The petitioner, who claims to be the foster son of the deceased Sk. Sahadulla and his widow, objected to the grant of such succession certificate to Mohammad Nabi, the natural brother of the deceased Sk. Sahadulla, i.e., the predecessor-in-interest of the present opposite parties on the ground that no succession certificate can be granted as the said application do not come within the scope and ambit of Section 372 of the Indian Succession Act, 19...
Jogendra Kumar Naik Vs. Kanhu Charan Moharana
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jun-27-2002
Reported in: 2002(II)OLR316
Bimala Prasad Das, J.1. This revision is directed against the order dated 8.5.2001 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Sambalpur in Money Suit No. 107 of 1991 thereby holding that the promissory note is insufficiently stamped and directing the plaintiff to impound the document by making payment of deficit stamp duty along with penalty by the next date.2. The ground on which the challenge has been made to the aforesaid order is that the non-mention of the words 'to the order or bearer on demand' is irrelevant and thus this promissory note will come under category No. (iii) of Article 49 of Schedule-I of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 (in short 'the Act') and is thus properly stamped with 40 paise revenue stamp. It is also further alleged that the applicability of Clause (b) of Article 49 of the Act is erroneous. The learned counsel for the petitioner draws my attention to the order dated 31.7.1995 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Sambalpur wherein it was...
Hemanta Kumar Kar Vs. Srimanta Kumar Kar
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jun-26-2002
Reported in: 94(2002)CLT156
A.S. Naidu, J. 1. This Misc. Case has been filed with a prayer to recall the order dated November 11, 2001 passed in Criminal Misc. Case No. 3937 of 2001. The said Criminal Misc. Case was filed by the petitioner inter alia praying to quash/set aside the order of cognizance passed ICC No. 9 of 2000 by the learned S.D.J.M., Bhubaneswar. By the impugned order the court below on the basis of the initial statement of the complainant and on consideration of other materials available on record and on being prima facie satisfied that there were materials to reveal commission of an offence under Section 448, IPC (Amended), took cognizance of the offence.2. In course of hearing of the Criminal Misc. Case when this Court was not inclined to quash the order of cognizance, Mr. B. C. Patri, learned counsel for the petitioner, submitted in Court that if time was allowed till the end of January, 2002, his client was willing to vacate the disputed premises. On the basis of the said submission, without ...
Deepika Maharana Vs. Prasanna Maharana @ Prasanna Kumar Maharana
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jun-26-2002
Reported in: 94(2002)CLT168; 2002(II)OLR311
A.S. Naidu, J. 1. The petitioner, a young lady of twenty four years, has filed this application under Section 24 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 inter alia praying to transfer Civil Proceeding No. 147 of 1999 pending adjudication before the Judge, Family Court, Rourkela to the Judge, Family Court, Cuttack.2. It is alleged that the petitioner married the opposite party as per the Hindu rites and customs on April 19, 1998. The opposite party-husband is serving as an Additional Veterinary Assistant Surgeon and is at present posted at Kuanrmunda Veterinary Hospital, Rourkela. According to the petitioner-wife, dowry amount as demanded both in the shape of cash and kind was paid to the parents of the opposite party, the details of which are vividly described in paragraph - 4 of the petition. As ill luck would have it, dissensions cropped at the very inception, inasmuch as the opposite party did not accept the petitioner and she was told that the opposite party had ...
Laxmi Sahoo and anr. Vs. Chaturbhuj Sahoo and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jun-26-2002
Reported in: AIR2003Ori8; I(2003)DMC414
B. Panigrahi, J.1. The appellants originally filed a suit before the learned Subordinate Judge, Rourkela, in Title Suit No. 63 of 1990 for a declaration that there was a valid marriage between appellant No. 1 and respondent No. 1 in the year 1970 and out of their wedlock a female child was born. After constitution of the Family Court at Rourkela, the said suit was transferred and renumbered as Original Suit No. 49 of 1991. It has been averred in the plaint that both the parties professed Hindu religion and there was lawful marriage solemnised on the day of Rama Navami in the year 1970 according to Hindu rites. It was consumated at Kapilas where both the spouses, namely, appellant No. 1 and respondent No. 1 led their conjugal life for about 8 months, during which period appellant No. 1 became pregnant. During the period of pregnancy, appellant No. 1 went to her parents' house at Patrapali. She delivered a female child there. But, when she came with the female child to the house of respo...
Smt. Sumani Kharsel Vs. Dayamati Kharsel and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jun-21-2002
Reported in: 94(2002)CLT86
P.K. Tripathy, J.1. Heard. 2. In this revision application under Section 401, Cr.P.C. petitioner, who is second party No. 1 in Criminal Misc. Case No. 141 of 1998 of the Court of Executive Magistrate, Titilagarh, challenges correctness and legality of the order of the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Titilagarh in Criminal Revision No. 4 of 1999, as per the impugned judgment dated 10.5.1999.3. To decide the issue which has been raised by the petitioner, a brief reference to ascertain the salient features involved in the case should be referred to. Opposite party No. 1 Dayamati Kharsel is the first party and the petitioner and opposite party members 2 to 6 are the second party members in Criminal Misc. Case No. 141 of 1998 of the Court of Executive Magistrate, Titilagarh. That is a proceeding under Section 145, Cr.P.C., in which in 1998 preliminary order under Sub-section (1) of Section 145, Cr.P.C. was passed besides an order directing the local police to keep in custody the standing crop...
Ganesh Nayak and ors. Vs. Collector, Kalahandi and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jun-21-2002
Reported in: 94(2002)CLT298
L. Mohapatra, J. 1. Plaintiffs are the appellants before this Court against the reversing judgment. Case of the plaintiffs is that they are the grandsons and great grandson of late Bhaja Gaountia of villageBhatel. The said Bhaja Gaountia had excavated a tank in the year 1906 on his own expenses and possessed the same till his death. After his death his sons, grandsons and great grandsons were in exclusive enjoyment of-fish and water over the tank by making improvements in the tank. The said tank was recorded as 'Adkata' over plot No. 195 of 1912 settlement, as 'Kusumkata' over plot No. 360 of 1922-23 settlement, and as 'Sagar' over plot No. 603 with an area of Ac. 24.77 decimals, plot No. 605 with an area of Ac. 0.39 decimals, plot No. 606 with an area of Ac. 0.46 decimals and plot No. 603/614 with an area of Ac. 0.78 decimals in total for an area of Ac. 26.40 decimals in the current settlement 1955-56. After construction of tank as per the revenue law in practice the tank became rent ...
Binayak Behera and anr. Vs. State of Orissa and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jun-21-2002
Reported in: 94(2002)CLT257; 2002(II)OLR247
P.K. Balasubramanyan, C.J. 1. The prayer in this writ petition is for the issue of a writ of certiorari to set aside or cancel the auction held in respect of the sand source pertaining to Khata No. 1902, Plot No. 4148, Area -45 Acres under Mouza Pratapsasan, District - Khurda. The writ petition proceeds on the basis that it is in public interest. The main aspect projected before us at the time of hearing is that by auctioning the sand source and permitting the contractor to remove the sand away from that source, the embankment of the river in the concerned area will be severely damaged leading to danger to the public during floods. The petitioners place strong reliance on the letters of two Executive Engineers of the Irrigation Department annexed as Annexures 1 and 2 to the Original Petition. Annexure-1is the letter dated 5.11.2001 written by the Executive Engineer, Nimapara Irrigation Division, Nimapara to theTahasildar, Bhubaneswar when the proposed auction of the sand source was not...
Berhampur Municipality, Represented by the Executive Officer Vs. P. Bh ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jun-21-2002
Reported in: AIR2002Ori193; 94(2002)CLT461
Pradip Mohanty, J. 1. The Berhampur Municipality through its Executive Officer, being aggrieved by the order dated 11.11.1985 of the First AdditionalDistrict Judge, Berhampur in Title Appeal No. 17 of 1985 allowing in part the order dated 31.8.1984 passed by the Munsif, Berhampur, in T.M.S. No. 100 of 1983 has preferred this Second Appeal invoking, the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure.2. The case of the plaintiff-Berhampur Municipality, in brief, is that the Berhampur Municipality (a Corporate Body) through its Executive Officer filed the suit for realisation of arrear holding and other taxes from the defendant. It is asserted in the plaint that the plaintiff is a body corporate under the Orissa Municipal Act, 1950 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') and has authority to levy and collect holding tax and other taxes under the said Act. The defendant-respondent owns a house in L.I.G. Colony, Gajapati Nagar under the Berhampur Municipality and...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »