Orissa Court April 2003 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.
Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd. Vs. Ultramatrix Systems Private Ltd.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Apr-07-2003
Reported in: 96(2003)CLT131
ORDERP.K. Tripathy, J.1. Heard.2. This Civil Revision is disposed of at the stage of hearing on admission with their consent and after hearing learned counsel for both the parties.3. It reveals from the LCR that petitioner as the plaintiff filed Money Suit No. 141 of 1991 in the Court of Subordinate Judge (Civil Judge (Sr. Division) at Jeypore. For the failure of the defendant to file written statement he was set ex parte on 30.3.1993. The suit was thereafter adjourned from time to time for ex parte hearing. Such hearing was concluded on 19.8.1995 when argument was heard and thereafter on 4.9.199,5 judgment was delivered by granting ex parte decree in favour of the plaintiff. On 25.4.1997 defendant filed application under Order IX Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (in short 'the Code') and that was registered as M.J.C. No. 25 of 1997. When the Court of Civil Judge (Sr. Division) was opened at Koraput, on the ground of jurisdiction, that MJC was transferred. Accordingly, MJC ...
National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Bhagaban Behera and ors. and Laxma ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Apr-07-2003
Reported in: 96(2003)CLT388; 2003(I)OLR554
P.K. Mohanty, J.1.Both the appeals are from a common judgment of the Commissionerof Workmen's Compensation; on the consent and on agreementof the learned counsel for the parties, they are heard analogousand disposed of by this common judgment.2. Misc. Appeal No. 196 of 2002 is directed against the award of the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation-cum-Assistant Labour Commissioner, Cuttack in W. C. Case No. 88-D of 2000, whereas Misc. Appeal No. 197 of 2002 is against the award passed in W.C. Case No. 89-D of 2000, delivered in a common judgment,3. The brief facts are that the claimants were working as Driver and Coolie of the truck bearing registration No. OIU 5893 and on 15.2.2000 at about 4.30 P.M. While discharging their duties, they sustained bodily injuries resulting in disability arising out of and in course of their employment and hence the claim for compensation. The owner and insurer were made parties and they had filed their separate written statements. The owner in his wr...
Maa Barunei Enterprisers Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Apr-04-2003
Reported in: 95(2003)CLT616
A.K. Patnaik, J. 1. The petitioner is a registered partnership firm dealing with, inter alia, scrap materials. The Deputy Manager (Project), Dredging Corporation of India, Project Office, Paradeep, invited sealed tenders for disposal of scrap materials by tender notice dated 30.10.2002. As per the said tender notice, tenders were to be received at 15.00 hours and were to be opened at 15.50 hours on 20.11.2002. The case of the petitioner in this writ petition is that on 20.11.2002, only three sealed tenders had been submitted before the Deputy Manager (Project), Dredging Corporation of India, Project Office, Paradeep and the tender of the petitioner was the highest at Rs. 6,49,368/-. The Deputy Manager (Project) by his letter dated 21.11,2002 requested the petitioner to attend his office on 21. 11.2002 for negotiation and in response to the said letter, the managing partner of the petitioner firm attended the office of the Deputy Manager (Project) at Paradeep on 21.11.2002 and agreed to...
Samir Francis and ors. Vs. State of Orissa and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Apr-04-2003
Reported in: 2003CriLJ2923; II(2004)DMC159
ORDERL. Mohapatra, J.1. This application under Section 482, Cr. P.C. has been filed challenging the order dated 18-9-2001 passed by the learned J.M.F.C., Baripada in G.R. Case No. 214 of 1999 framing charge for commission of offences under Sections 498-A, 406 and 34 of the Penal Code read with Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.2. Petitioner No. 1 is the husband of the informant, Puja Shaw. The F.I.R. has been lodged on the allegation that the marriage of the informant with the petitioner No. 1 was solemnised on 24-8-1996 at Bhubaneswar and at the time of marriage a part of the dowry demanded had been paid and it was also agreed for payment of the balance dowry at a later stage. On perusal of the F.I.R. it also appears that due to nonpayment of the dowry demanded by the petitioner No. 1 and the family members of petitioner No. 1, the informant was subjected to torture at Bhubaneswar, Berhampur as well as at Oman where the petitioner No. 1 was serving. The F.I.R. describes in...
Smt. Mamata Manjari Sanibigraha Vs. Sri Debendra Prasad Sanibigraha
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Apr-04-2003
Reported in: 2003(I)OLR536
ORDERP.K. Tripathy, J.1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.2. This revision is directed against the order passed by learned District Judge, Balasore on July 18, 2002 in Misc. Case No. 17 of 2002. a proceeding under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure. 1908 (in short 'the Code'). After service of notice on the opposite party he has not appeared to contest the Civil Revision Petition.3. Petitioner is the respondent and the opposite party is the applicant in Title Suit No. 750 of 2001 instituted for the relief under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. That suit has been instituted and pending in the Court of Civil Judge (Senior Division), Balasore. Inter se relationship between the petitioner and the opposite party as the wife and husband is not in dispute. When the suit was posted for peremptory hearing, as noted in the impugned order an application for transfer of the suit was moved in the Court of District Judge, Balasore. After hearing both the parties learned Dist...
Smt. Bina Das Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Apr-03-2003
Reported in: 95(2003)CLT545
A.S. Naidu, J. 1. This Criminal Appeal challenges the judgment passed by the 2nd Addl. Sessions Judge, Cuttack in S.T. No. 519 of 2001 holding the appellant guilty of the offence under Section 3(1)(iv) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') and convicting her thereunder and sentencing her to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months and to pay a fine of Rs. 500.00, in default to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for one month.2. One Laxman Jena, the complainant, filed a Complaint Case before the S.D.J.M. (S), Cuttack which was registered as ICC NO. 3 of 1994, alleging that he was the exclusive owner of the case land and had constructed his house thereon. He had inducted one Babaji Mallick as a tenant in his house and then in 1972 he inducted one Jagannath Jena as tenant who used to pay rent to him. It is alleged that said Jagannath Jena sub-let the case house to the Socialists Unity Centre of...
Aswini Kumar Panda Vs. State of Orissa and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Apr-02-2003
Reported in: AIR2003Ori175; 2003(I)OLR658
A.K. Patnaik, J.1. The petitioner in all these three writ petitions is one and the same. By auction notice dated 16-3-2001, the Tahasildar, Jaleswar in Sairat Lease Misc. Case No. 35 of 2001 notified that sairat sand quarry of Sekasarai would be put to auction for the year 2001-2002. In the said auction notice dated 16-3-2001, the details of the said sairat source were indicated as Plot No. 2 in Khata No. 142 measuring an area Ac. 86.0 dec. Thereafter, auction of the said sairat source was held on 30-3-2001.2. The case of the petitioner in O.J.C. No. 9432 of 2001 is that the entire area of Ac. 86.90 in Plot No. 2. Khata No. 142 was put to auction. The petitioner offered the highest bid of Rs. 2,50,000/- and the bid was knocked in his favour. Subsequently, however, the Tahasildar, Jaleswar took a stand that only Ac, 30.00 in plot No. 2/1 of Khata No. 142 has been auctioned in favour of the petitioner. Thereafter, fresh auction notice dated 16-7-2001 was published by the Tahasildar in Sa...
Bisurnarayan Behura Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Apr-02-2003
Reported in: 2004CriLJ199; 2003(I)OLR566
A.S. Naidu, J.1. This Criminal Revision has been filed challenging an order dated 30th December, 1996 passed by the 2nd Addl. Sessions Judge, Puri in Criminal Appeal No. 36/119 of 1995/96 confirming an order of conviction and sentence dated 27-7-1994 passed by the J.M.F.C., Puri in 2(a) CC No. 536 of 1993. The petitioner has been convicted under Section 47(f) of the Bihar and Orissa Excise Act and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for six months and to pay a fine of Rs. 500.00, in default to undergo further simple imprisonment for one month.2. Prosecution came up with a case that at about 10.30 a.m. on 13-10-199 3 while the S.I. of Excise, Puri Sadar was patrolling at Balinolia Sahi (Upper Sahi) along with his staff, receiving reliable information about illicit distillation of liquor by the petitioner in his house, caught him red-handed while he was engaged in such illicit distillation of liquor using one aluminium Dekchi containing twenty litres of hot formented Gur-wash, one e...
Sania Jani Vs. State
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Apr-02-2003
Reported in: 2004CriLJ226; 2003(I)OLR569
ORDERA.S. Naidu, J.1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Addl. Standing Counsel for the opposite party-State.2. This Criminal Revision has been preferred inter alia challenging the order dated 10-5-2002 passed by the Ad hoc Addl. Sessions Judge, Jeypore in Criminal Appeal No. 132 of 2001 confirming an order dated 25-8-1990 passed by the C.J.M.-cum-Assist-ant Sessions Judge, Jeypore in Sessions Case No. 18 of 1997. convicting the petitioner under Sections 450/376, IPC and sentencing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years and to pay a fine ofRs. 500.00, in default to undergo simpleimprisonment for three months for the offence under Section 376, I.P.C. and to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two yearsfor the offence under Section 450, I.P.C. withdirection that both the sentences would runconcurrently.3. Bereft of all unnecessary details, the short facts alleged by the prosecution are that on 29-8-1996 at about 3 p.m. when the prosecutrix was in the kit...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›