Orissa Court November 2003 Judgments
Birla Tyres Vs. Jogendra Sethi and Three ors. and L.A. Collector
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Nov-28-2003
Reported in: 2004(I)OLR40
ORDERP.K. Tripathy, J.1. Learned Addl.Govt. Advocate accepts notice for the Opp.Party No. 5.2. Heard.3. This Civil Revision is directed against order passed on 5.7.2003 by the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Balasore in Execution Case No. 28 of 2002. One Sri Anoj Kumar Agarwal has filed an affidavit stating that though the decision reported in 2003 (1) LACC 170 (Govt. of Goa v. Agrelo Santlmans Ferndes and Ors.) was relied on, but learned Civil Judge did not consider the citation while passing the impugned order. If that be so, learned Civil Judge is cautioned to desist from such a wrong practice inasmuch as when parties refer to and rely on citations in support of their contentions, such citations should be referred to whether or not accepted as the law governing the field and such observation be noted in the order. Since that aspect was not considered by the Court below which is apparent from the impugned order, this Court sets aside the impugned order and direct the Civil Judge (Sr. ...
Tag this Judgment!Daud Lima Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Nov-21-2003
Reported in: 96(2003)CLT745
P.K. Mohanty, J. 1. This matter has come to this Division Bench on a reference made by one of us P.K. Mohanty, J. sitting single.2. The question for consideration is whether irrespective of rejection of petitioner's earlier bail application, the second application for bail should be considered in parity with the subsequent orders passed by two learned single Benches of this Court releasing the co-accused persons on bail.3. Facts in brief is that the petitioner along with two others was found to have carried 4 to 5 Kgs. of Ganja each in their respective bags and that was seized and a case under Section 20(b) of the N.D.P.S. Act was registered. The present petitioner and the co-accused Susanta Kumar Moharana filed separate petitions before the learned Special Judge for release on bail. The learned Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Parlakhemundi in G.R. Case No. 221 of 2002 rejected the bail application as against which Criminal Misc. Case No. 6263 of 2002 was filed before this...
Tag this Judgment!Crown Re-roller (P) Ltd. Vs. State of Orissa in the Department of Fina ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Nov-21-2003
Reported in: 2004(I)OLR107; [2005]139STC305(Orissa)
A.K. Patnaik, J.1. This is the third time that the petitioner company has come to this Court for sales tax benefits under the Industrial Policy Resolution, 1986.2. The State Government of Orissa formulated the Industrial Policy Resolution, 1986 effective from 1.4.1986 announcing a package of incentives to new industrial units including exemption from sales tax on purchase of raw materials for a period of five years from the date of commercial production. Accordingly, by Finance Department Notification No. 5389 dated 13.2.1987, entry 26-D (i) was inserted in the Tax Free Schedule exempting purchase of raw materials by new industrial units from sales tax for a period of five years from the date of commercial production. The petitioner set up a re-rolling mill at A/3, Kalunga Industrial Estate, Kalunga and commenced commercial production on 2.10.1987. The petitioner was initially allowed exemption from payment of sales tax on purchase of raw materials under Industrial Policy Resolution, 1...
Tag this Judgment!Madhu Sudan Pradhan and ors. Vs. Santosh Kumar Das
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Nov-20-2003
Reported in: AIR2004Ori86
ORDERP.K. Tripathy, J.1. Defect No. 25 is Ignored.2. Heard.3. This writ petition is as against the order passed on 23-1-2002 by the Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Nayagarh in rejecting the application filed by the plaintiffs/petitioners for deputing a Survey Knowing Commissioner to find out as to who is in possession of the suit premises and whether any development has been undertaken in the suit premises, i.e. the residential premises. The suit, i.e., Title Suit No. 51 of 1993 is for specific performance of contract on the basis of agreement for sale, said by plaintiffs to have been validly executed by the sole defendant/opposite party on receipt of part consideration amount and giving delivery of possession. It is also admitted that in the suit plaintiffs have sought for a direction to the defendant to receive balance consideration amount and to execute the sale deed and in the alternative to grant compensation amount Rs. 80,000/- (eighty thousand) for the loss and damages which he has ...
Tag this Judgment!Ganesh Prasad Dash Vs. Tilottama Dash and Narayan Prasad Dash and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Nov-19-2003
Reported in: 2004(I)OLR4
ORDERP.K. Tripathy, J.1. Heard.2. On consent of the parties, this writ petition stands disposed at the stage of admission.3. Order passed on 28.8.2002 by the Civil Judge (Sr. Division), First Court, Cuttack in Title Suit No. 290 of 2001 is under challenge. It appears from that order that an application filed by the plaintiffs/opp. parties for appointing a Guardian Ad- litem (in short, 'G.A.L.') for defendant Nos. 2 and 3 in accordance with the provisions in Order 32, Rule 15 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (in short, 'C. P.C.') was resisted by the Defendant No. 1/the present petitioner with the claim that he should be appointed as guardian for the said defendant Nos. 2 and 3. Learned Civil Judge rejected that contention of the petitioner and allowed the application for appointment of Court Guardian on the grounds that in an earlier suit for partition, i.e., Title Suit No. 92 of 1998 filed by the petitioner, defendant Nos. 2 and 3 of the present suit were added as defendant Nos. 3 ...
Tag this Judgment!Bhagirathi Das Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Nov-19-2003
Reported in: 2004(I)OLR148
Sujit Barman Roy, C.J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 17th March, 1989 passed by the Sessions Judge, Balasore In S.T. No. 108 of 1988 convicting the appellant Bhagirathi Das under Section 302 I.P.C. and sentencing him thereunder to suffer R.I. for life.2. The prosecution case in brief is that on 9.5.1988 a written complaint was lodged by P.W. 1-Prasant Pal before the Officer-in-charge of Bhogarai Police Station, Bhogarai stating, inter alia, that the appellant-Bhagirathi Das, who was attached to Laxmipatna Police Out-Post as a police constable was residing in a rented house near the house of P.W.1, that day around at 10 'O' Clock in the morning while his son Raj Kumar Pal (since deceased) was going to take bath, the appellant took him to his residence and killed him by assaulting him with iron rod. Thereafter he locked the room and went away somewhere. While searching for his son for sometime, P.W.1 came to learn that the appellant had confined the deceased in his...
Tag this Judgment!Orissa Consumers Cooperative Federation Ltd. Vs. the Presiding Officer ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Nov-14-2003
Reported in: 97(2004)CLT316; (2004)ILLJ1014Ori; 2003(II)OLR669
ORDERB. P. Das, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as opposite party No. 2.2. The Management of Orissa Consumers Co-operative Federation Ltd. has preferred this writ petition assailing the order dated 21.8.2002 passed by the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Bhubaneswar, in I.D. Case No. 50/1993 (Annexure-9) wherein the petitioner has been asked to adduce evidence at the first instance.3. Briefly stated, the facts leading to the present writ petition are that an industrial dispute was raised by O.P. No. 2-workman and on failure of conciliation, the matter was referred to the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Bhubaneswar, for adjudication of the following dispute :'Whether the dismissal of Sri Sridhar Gochhayat, Ex-Branch Manager by the Management of M/s. Orissa Consumers Cooperative Federation Ltd., Bhubaneswar, w.e.f. 13.4.87 is legal and/or justified If not, what relief Shri Gochhayat is entitled to ?'The aforesaid reference was registered as I.D. Case No. 50/1993 o...
Tag this Judgment!Dr. Subhasish Singh and ors. Vs. Convenor, P.G. (Medical) Selection Co ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Nov-14-2003
Reported in: 2003(II)OLR652
P.K. Mohanty, J.1. The petitioners in all these writ petitions are the Medical Graduates from either of the three Government Medical Colleges affiliated to three respective Universities of the State of Orissa. They have been registered as Medical Practitioners after completion of their mandatory internship/housemanship. It is their claim that having a brilliant academic career, they were interested in prosecuting Post Graduate Medical Course in faculties of their choice during the academic session 2003 by competing in the entrance test for admission to such courses like in earlier years. But to their disappointment, by the illegal and arbitrary decision of the State Government, they have become ineligible, the entire seats in the Post-Graudate medical course having been reserved for in-service candidates only.2. Challenge is made to the 'eligibility criteria of applicants' seeking admission to the Post Graduate Medical Course, 2003 in three medical colleges of Orissa in advertisement d...
Tag this Judgment!All India Federation of Tax Practitioners and anr. Vs. Union of India ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Nov-12-2003
Reported in: [2003]264ITR466(Orissa)
1. Issue notice of this application as above.2. Learned senior standing counsel (Central) accepts notice on behalf of all the opposite parties.3. This is an application praying for stay of operation of the impugned National Tax Tribunal Ordinance, 2003.4. Dr. Pal, learned counsel for the petitioners, submits that when on October 16, 2003, this Ordinance was issued Parliament was not sitting. However, the monsoon session of Parliament was concluded in the month of August, 2003. The winter session of Parliament is also due to commence on December 3, 2003. In these circumstances, according to him, there was no justification to issue the Ordinance in question under Article 123 of the Constitution of India. Dr. Pal, further contends that there was no material before the President for satisfying himself to take immediate action for promulgation of the Ordinance in question under Article 123 of the Constitution of India. That apart, Dr. Pal further contends that the Ordinance in question was ...
Tag this Judgment!The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., Represented Through the Divisional Ma ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Nov-12-2003
Reported in: I(2005)ACC390; 97(2004)CLT92; 2004(I)OLR61
B. P. Das, J.1. The Petitioner-insurer has filed this writ petition challenging the order dated 19.10.2001 by which the 2nd Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Keonjhar, has rejected the application filed by the petitioner with a prayer to set aside the award passed by the Tribunal directing payment of compensation of Rs. 1,30,000/- to the claimants-opposite party Nos. 1 to 3 by the insurer-petitioner, on the basis of a compromise effected between the insurer and the claimants in a LokAdalat held on 28/29.10.2000. The compromise petition was made a part of the award. The standard form of compromise contains certain conditions which are as follows :1. Disposal of case filed under Section 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act, if any.2. Confirmation of policy by the Insurer within two/three months.3. Confirmation of D/L by the Insurer within two/three months.4. Place of issue of D/L by the claimant (S) within one month and verification by the Insurer within two months thereafter.5. Place of issue o...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »