Orissa Court August 2003 Judgments
Somanath Sahani Vs. Smt. Chhaya Sahani and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-29-2003
Reported in: 2003(II)OLR594
Pradip Mohanty, J.1. This revision is directed against the order dated 5.7.2003 passed by the Executive Magistrate, Bhanjanagar in M.C. No. 162 of 2001, a proceeding under Section 145 Cr.P.C., on the petition filed under Section 146 Cr.P.C. directing attachment of the disputed lands and appointing Revenue Inspector, Mottabadi as the custodian. The petitioner, in this revision, has also impugned the order dated 7.7.2003 of the Executive Magistrate refusing to revoke the order dated 5.7.2003.2. The petitioner-second party member is the father of opp. parties 2 to 5 and husband of opp. party No. 6 - the other second party member. The opp. party No. 1 who is the first party member, claims to be the second wife of the present petitioner, which is disputed by the second party members. During the pendency of the proceeding, at the instance of the first party member, the learned Executive Magistrate passed the impugned orders of attachment and appointed the Revenue Inspector, Mottabadi as the ...
Tag this Judgment!Niranjan Bharati Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-29-2003
Reported in: 2003(II)OLR399
L. Mohapatra, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order of conviction passed by the learned Special Judge (Vigilance), Sambalpur in T.R. Case No. 5 of 1999 convicting the appellant under Sections 13(2) and 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The appellant has been sentenced to undergo R.I. for one year and has also been directed to pay Rs. 1000/-, in default to undergo R.I. for a period of ' three months.2. Case of the prosecution is that one Kailash Chandra Dehury (P.W.3) was working as Peon in the office of the S.D.O., National Highway Sub-Division, Angul. He had applied for sanction of loan from G.P.F. account and also had submitted an application for some advances to meet the medical expenses of his wife. He had also applied for leave salary due to him. The above applications were sent to the office of the Executive Engineer, National Highway Division, Ohenkanal where the appellant was working as Dealing Assistant and was required to process the applicati...
Tag this Judgment!Namita SwaIn Vs. Board of Secondary Education and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-28-2003
Reported in: 96(2003)CLT342; 2003(II)OLR385
1. Heard Sri S. N. Sahoo, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Sri S. K. Nayak-1, learned counsellor the opposite party-Board of Secondary Education, Orissa.2. The petitioner has approached this Court with the following prayers.'(i) Why the Opp. Parties will not be directed to issue form in favour of the petitioner and to accept the filled up forms from her and to allow her to appear the Teachers Certificate Examination, 2003 in old syllabus either compartmentally or in all subjects; and; If the opp. Parties do not show cause or show insufficient cause then the rule be made absolute by issuing an appropriate writ/writs, direction/directions, and any other order/orders as deem fit and proper may be passed.' 3. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of opposite party No. 1 -Board wherefrom it is revealed that the petitioner took the C. T. Examination, 2000 as a regular candidate but could not become successful. Subsequently, she took the examination in the year 2001, where she h...
Tag this Judgment!Benumadhab Padhi Mohapatra Vs. State
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-28-2003
Reported in: 2004CriLJ505; 2003(II)OLR538
A.S. Naidu, J. 1. The order of conviction and sentence passed in Sessions Trial No. 21/49 of 1991 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Balasore convicting the three appellants under Section 498-A read with Section 34, IPC read with Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act and sentencing each of them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years under Section 498-A, IPC only, is challenged in this appeal.2. Bereft of all unnecessary details, the facts necessary for appreciating the case are as follows :--An FIR was filed by P.W. 1 on 31-5-1990 at Simulia Police Station alleging that his daughter Gayatri alias Mami who had been given in marriage to appellant No. 1 on 12-3-1990 expired on 28th May, 1990 and that he suspected that the death of his daughter was due to dowry torture. It was alleged in the FIR that at the time of marriage, as per the denial of the bridegroom party, a cash of Rs. 8,000.00 was given to them towards marriage expenses along with other articles like a T.V., ...
Tag this Judgment!Araf Mulla Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-28-2003
Reported in: 2004(I)OLR70
A.S. Naidu, J.1. The judgment dated 22.4.1992 passed by the Addl. Sessions Judge, Balasore in S.T. No. 24/132 of 1991 convicting the appellant under Section 412 IPC and sentencing him thereunder to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years is impugned in this appeal.2. On the basis of an FIR filed on 3.3.1991 alleging that some unknown persons entered into the house of the informant armed with guns and other weapons and committed dacoity, the criminal action was set in motion. Seven accused persons including the appellant were arrested who faced their trial for alleged commission of offences under Sections 457/398/216-A of Indian and Penal Code besides Section 9-B(b) of the Indian Explosive Substances Act and Section 27 of the Indian Arms Act. The learned trial Court found all the accused persons not guilty of the offences under Sections 457/395/216-A of IPC and also Section 9-B(b) of the Indian Explosive Substance Act and Section 27 of the Indian Arms Act and acquitted them of the...
Tag this Judgment!Koresh Chandra Mahurya Vs. State of Orissa and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-26-2003
Reported in: 96(2003)CLT494
P.K. Mohanty, J. 1. The petitioner assails the order of his removal (Annexure-1) dated 12.9.1994 from the post of Secretary of Benagam Panchayat and prays for quashing the charges levelled against him or in the alternative to direct conclusion of the enquiry after following the Rules of natural justice. Prayer is made for quashing the order in Annexure-2.2. The petitioner was working as the Secretary of Benagam Grama Panchayat under Boriguma Block of Koraput district. It is alleged that due to difference of opinion with the Sarapanch (Opp. party No. 8), he managed to get a resolution passed on 12.9.1994, initiating some vexatious allegations like, not opening the Panchayat Office for two years and the petitioner staying at a distance of 3 Kms. away from the Grama Panchayat and not discharging his duties sincerely. Opp. party No. 6 was requested to take charge of the office of the Secretary of the Grama Panchayat. A copy of the Resolution dated 12.9.1994 has been annexed as Annexure-1. ...
Tag this Judgment!Salma Majhi and ors. Vs. Bija Majhi and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-26-2003
Reported in: AIR2004Ori46; 96(2003)CLT590; 2003(II)OLR596
P.K. Tripathy, J.1. Heard.2. In this application under Order 40, Rule 1, CPC, plaintiff-appellants pray for appointment of receiver of the suit land measuring an area of Ac. 7.91 decimals.3. On a bare reading of the provision in Order 40, Rule 1, CPC, it is clear that the matter relating to appointment of receiver is purely at the discretion of the Court. It is the well accepted principle that such discretion should be exercised judiciously and not arbitrarily. Therefore, from the facts and circumstances, available to it, a Court shall consider whether it is just and convenient to appoint a receiver for the subject matter of dispute. In that context, it is to be considered, if the party applying for appointment of receiver has an excellent chance of success in the suit, there is danger to the suit property being wasted or mis-managed or the disputed property remains uncared for being in medio and that the person applying for the appointment of receiver has a better claim over the subje...
Tag this Judgment!Suchit Kumar Sahoo Vs. Administrative Officer, Orissa Maritime Academy ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-26-2003
Reported in: 96(2003)CLT599; 2003(II)OLR380
P.K. Mohanty, J.1. The petitioner calls in question the letter of the Administrative Officer, Orissa Maritime Academy informing him not to take admission, in view of the guidelines of the Director General of Shipping, changing the upper age limit for entry to Pre-Sea Rating Training (General Purpose) since he is crossing the prescribed age limit on the date fixed for admission.2. The petitioner, a diploma holder in Mechanical Engineering and had passed +2 Science Examination, applied for admission to Pre-Sea Rating Training (General Purpose) in Orissa Maritime Academy, Paradip (hereinafter called 'Academy'), pursuant to the 'Admission Notice' issued by the Academy in daily newspaper 'Samaj' dated 17th April, 2002, copy whereof is Annexure-1 to the writ petition. In letter dated 19th July, 2002, he was intimated by the Administrative Officer of the Academy to report to the Principal on 12th August, 2002 at 8.00 A.M. along with required documents in original for appearing at an English t...
Tag this Judgment!Sri Gayadhar Panda Vs. the Registrar (Admn.) High Court of Orissa and ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-26-2003
Reported in: 96(2003)CLT800; 2003(II)OLR473
P.K. Mohanty, J.1. The writ petitioners in both the writ applications are Judicial Officers, who call in question the promotion of opp. Party No. 2 to the cadre of Orissa Judicial Service, Class-1 (Junior) (S.D.J.M.) by superseding them and six other senior officers in the cadre of Orissa Judicial Service, Class-11.2. Briefly stated, the case of the petitioner in O.J.C. No. 1542 of 1995 is that, he was appointed as a Probationary Munsif in the year 1985 and he has an excellent service record without any adverse remark in the C.C.R. The petitioner's position in the seniority list of the year 1992 was at serial No. 19, whereas the opp. Party No. 2 was at serial No. 20. Subsequently, by Gazette notification dated 1 st January, 1994 under Rule 27 of the Orissa Judicial Service Rules, 1994 (hereinafter called as 'O.J.S. Rules, 1964') and pursuant to the direction of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the petitioner's seniority was refixed and he was placed at serial No. 8, whereas the seniority pos...
Tag this Judgment!Pradeepta Kumar Mohapatra Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Aug-26-2003
Reported in: 97(2004)CLT34
P.K. Mohanty, J. 1. The petitioner assails the order of discharge from Army service and prays for a direction to absorb him in service forthwith.2. Briefly stated, the petitioner's case is that, he is a Non-Matric, had applied for appointment as a Soldier (G.D) in the Army, he was called for screening test/interview which he attended on 13.8.1997. The petitioner having been found suitable, got selected and enrolled as a Soldier (S.H.G.D.) and was sent for training to A.O.C. Centre, Secunderabad in the State of Andhra Pradesh. He was given training in general duty, trade and also under-went physical training and other exercises. He was allowed to draw a basic pay of Rs. 2440/-. Petitioner claims that he completed the training for the post of Soldier successfully in the month of November, 1998 in opposite party No. 2's Training Centre and was assigned with Identity Card bearing Army No. 6939820-K, Trade-SHGD with Rank-Soldier. However, when the petitioner was awaiting for a posting order...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »