Orissa Court August 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.
Gadadhar Pradhan Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-20-2002
Reported in: 2002(II)OLR401
B. Panigrahi, J.1. The accused in Sessions Case No. 50 of 1995 of the Court of learned Sessions Judge, Jeypore, is the sole appellant in this appeal. He was prosecuted under Sections 302/201 of the Indian Penal Code (in short, 'IPC') on the allegation that he intentionally caused murder of his wife, Saraswati Pradhan, and concealed the dead body inside the river Bansadhara in order to screen himself from the legal consequences. The learned Sessions Judge has convicted him for the said charges and has sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life under Section 302. IPC and rigorous imprisonment for one year under Section 201, IPC; the sentences to run concurrently.2. The skeletal picture of the prosecution story as depicted in course of trial is as follows :There was pre-marital relationship between the deceased and the appellant which led them to a martial tie. Thereafter, the appellant again married Basanti Pradhan (P.W.2). The deceased Saraswati being aggrieved by the action of the ...
National Aluminium Company Ltd. Vs. Orissa Electricity Regulatory Comm ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-19-2002
Reported in: 2003(I)OLR77
P.K. Mohanty, J.1. In these two appeals under Section 39 of the Orissa Electricity Reform Act, 1995 filed by the appellant M/s. National Aluminium Company Ltd. common question of law and facts being involved for determination, with the consent and on agreement of the learned counsel for the parties, they were heard analogous and are being disposed of by this common judgment.2. Misc. Appeal No. 651 of 1999 is directed against the order of the Orissa Electricity Regulatory Commission (hereinafter called 'Regulatory Commission') rejecting the appellant's application for review/clarification of its order dated 21.11.1998, passed by order dated 13.5.1999 in Case No. 4 of 1999, whereas the order dated 30.12.1999 passed by the Regulatory Commission in Case No. 12 of 1999, rejecting the objection of the appellant, regarding legality of levying wheeling charges and transmission loss in view of the purported agreement dated 15.1.1991 and 1.6.1994 with the erstwhile O.S.E.B. is under challenge in...
Ponni Sugars and Chemicals Ltd. Vs. Bargarh Cooperative Sugar Mills Lt ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-19-2002
Reported in: 2002(II)OLR351
R.K. Patra, J.1. The short question that arises for consideration in this revision is whether the learned trial Judge is justified in law in rejecting the application filed by the petitioner under Order 1, Rule 10 (2), C.P.C. to implead the State of Orissa as a party to the suit.2. The petitioner is defendant No. 1 in Money Suit No. 56 of 1997 pending on the file of the Civil Judge (Senior Division). Bargarh. The opposite parties as the plaintiff has filed the suit for recovery of Rs. 2,17,12.822/-(Rupees two crores seventeen lakhs twelve thousand eight hundred twenty two) only with interest thereon (Rs. 1,78,90,000/- towards arrear royalties plus damages of Rs. 38,22,822/-) from the petitioner. Its case is that it is a Cooperative Society registered under the Orissa Cooperative Societies Act. It owns the Baragarh Cooperative Sugar Mills with its plants at Tora. As it was unable to manage the plant profitably, it decided to hand over the management to some party for consideration. The ...
Bisi Golari Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-16-2002
Reported in: 2002(II)OLR447
P.K. Tripathy, J.1. Order of conviction under second part of Section 304, IPC vide the impugned judgment dated 18.10.1997 in Sessions Case No. 49 of 1997 of the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Jeypore is under challenge. Admittedly, appellant is inside the jail since 19.1.1997. He has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years.2. As per the prosecution case on 17.1.1997 at about 8 P.M. deceased in intoxicated condition (after taking 'Salap' juice) was creating noise by shouting and the appellant, one of his sons staying with him, came and asked the former to not to shout and received the rebuke of the deceased. As a matter of retaliation, appellant dealt a blow to the right side head of the deceased by using a 'Katha Mutula'. Deceased sustained bleeding injury and died at the spot. Siri Golari (P.W. 1), a neighbour was hearing the quarrel between the deceased and the appellant and when he arrived at the spot, he found the deceased lying dead with bleeding and t...
Maheswari Enterprises and Ambika Enterprises (Joint Venture) Vs. Mahan ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-16-2002
Reported in: 2002(II)OLR349
R.K. Patra, J.1. By this writ petition, the petitioner seeks to assail the validity of the decision of the Mahanadi Coalfields Limited communicated in letter dated 22.1.2002 at Annexure-1 debarring it from submitting any tender for a period of one year from 7.1.2002.2. The case of the petitioner briefly stated is that the Mahanadi Coalfields Limited (in brief 'M.C.L.') invited tenders for the work called 'Drivage of two inclines of Cross Section 5m x 3m and Length 410m for Natraj Project, Talcher Area; MCL'. Pursuant to the invitation, the petitioner submitted its tender which was accepted by the M.C.L. and letter of intent was placed with the petitioner on 16.10.2001. The M.C.L however, while placing the letter of intent imposed conditions beyond the scope of the tender and insisted the petitioner to execute the work which were not covered by the tender documents. The petitioner, accordingly, protested by insisting that the M.C.L. cannot travel beyond the scope of the work identified ...
Special Land Acquisition Officer Vs. Iswar Chandra Sahu, Rengali Irrig ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-16-2002
Reported in: 2002(II)OLR340
ORDERB.P. Das, J. 1. Heard Shri Sangram Das, Addl. Standing Counsel for the appellant.2. This mater was placed before this Court on the basis of the order dated 7.8.2002 by which the Registrar (Judicial) declined to admit the appeal on the ground of not depositing the decretal amount in terms of Order 41, Rule 1 (3), C.P.C. On a conjoint reading of Order 41, Rule 1(3) and Order 41, Rule 5(5), C.P.C., the irresistible conclusion is that deposit of decretal amount is not pre-requisite for admitting the appeal. The consequence of non-compliance of Order 41, Rule 1 (3), C.P.C. can only result in not granting the stay of execution of the decree. That apart, under Order 27, Rule 8-A. no security is required from Government or public officer in certain cases. Here, the appellant is the Government. So, Order 27. Rule 8(A), C.P.C. Is squarely applicable. The appeal is admitted. Requisites for issue of notice to the respondent to be filed within 7 days.3. The order passed by the Registrar (Judic...
Sahu Trust Vs. All India Council for Technical Education and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-16-2002
Reported in: 2002(II)OLR437
A.K. Patnaik, J. 1. The petitioner was accorded approval for starting a new technical institution, namely, The Institute of Technology Bhubaneswar, by the All India Council for Technical Education (for short, 'AICTE') by an order dated 21st of October, 1998.The AICTE passed an order dated 14th of December, 2001 withdrawing the approval accorded to the petitioner with immediate effect. A copy of the said order dated 14.12.2001 has been annexed to the writ petition as Annexure-3 and is quoted herein below :'ALL INDIA COUNCIL FOR TECHNICAL EDUCATION(A STATUTORY BODY OF THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA) F. NO : 760-82-220(E)/ET/97Date : 14th Dec. 2001 To, Commissioner Cum Secretary Industrial Department Govt of Orissa Bhubaneswar - 751001 Sub : Withdrawal of approval accorded to Institute of Technology, Bhubaneswar, Orissa. Sir, AICTE had accorded extension of approval to Institute of Technology, Bhubaneswar for the academic year 20O0-2001 for the following branches;Courses Intake Duration Perio...
Niladrinath Mohanty Vs. Ashok Kumar Mohanty and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-14-2002
Reported in: AIR2003Ori55
L. Mohapatra, J.1. Plaintiff is the appellant before this Court against a reversing judgment. 2. The suit was filed for permanent injunction restraining the defendants= respondents from interfering with the peaceful possession of the plaintiff in respect of the suit properties described in the schedule attached to the plaint. 3. The case of the plaintiff is that the suit properties are self acquired properties received by him under two deeds namely, 'registered gift deed dated 14-7-1976 and registered sale deed dated 5-1-1978. According to the plaintiff-appellant, he is in peaceful possession of the suit properties received by him under the aforesaid two deeds and the suit properties have been recorded in his name in the R. O. R. and he is paying rent for the same. Defendant No. 1 is the eldest son of the plaintiff staying separately. The further allegation of the plaintiff is that the defendant No. 1 is pulling on well with the other defendants and on 20th December, 1981 they attempte...
Danardan Patra Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-14-2002
Reported in: 2002(II)OLR443
P.K. Tripathy, J.1. This appeal has been filed by the appellant challenging the order of conviction for the offence under Section 376, IPC in S.T.No. 15/134 of 1993 in the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Balasore for his conviction under Section 376, IPC, appellant has been sentenced to undergo R.I. for seven years and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/-. It has been ordered that if the fine shall be paid the entire sum shall be paid to the prosecutrix (P.W.No. 5). That order of conviction was passed on July 20th 1994 and the appellant as stated by learned counsel for the appellant was an under trial prisoner. Therefore, it is stated at the Bar that the appellant has already suffered the imprisonment as per the impugned judgment.2. While challenging the order of conviction Mr. S. K.Tripathy addressing the Court on behalf of Mr. D.P.Dhal argues that even if the entire logic adopted by the trial Court is correct, then also on a reference to the evidence of the prosecutrix (P.W.6) and the Doct...
Amarjit Keshari Das Vs. State of Orissa and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-12-2002
Reported in: 2002(II)OLR406
P.K. Balasubramanyan, C.J.1. All these writ petitioners relate to recruitment to the Orissa Judicial Service, Class II. While the first two writ petitions relate to the selection conducted pursuant to a notice dated 10.8.1999, O. J. C. No. 6210 of 2001 seeks a declaration of Orissa Judicial Service Rules, 1994 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Rules') as ultra vires and seeks the issuance of a direction to the State to frame a fresh set of Rules essentially entrusting the recruitment to the High Court by keeping out the Orissa Public Service Commission or minimising its role. The prayer in OJC No. 1313 of 2002 is for the issue of a writ of mandamus directing the opposite parties to commence the recruitment process for filling up the vacancies in the Orissa Judicial Service, Class-II.2. On commencing the process of recruitment, the written examinations were held in different centres at Cuttack. There existed 85. vacancies and pursuant to Advertisement No. 10 of 1999-2000, 1475 candidates...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »