Orissa Court November 2004 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.
Kanduri Charan Parida Vs. Registrar (Judl.), High Court of Orissa and ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Nov-02-2004
Reported in: 99(2005)CLT189; [2005(104)FLR183]
A.S. Naidu, J.1. The petitioner is an erstwhile employee of the Orissa High Court establishment. He has filed the present Writ Application challenging the legality of the Order dated 5.4.2002 (Annexure-6) rejecting the representation filed by him regarding fixation of his pay admissible to the post of Addl. Deputy Registrar (Judl. and Estt.) of the Court. He has also sought for issuance of a direction to the opp. parties to compute the pension, gratuity and other retirement benefits as per the admissible Rules taking the last pay drawn, i.e., the pay admissible to Addl. Deputy Registrar (Judl. and Estt).2. According to the petitioner after rendering about 37 years of service, he was promoted to the post of Addl. Stamp Reporter-cum-Oath Commissioner by Order dated 4.8.2001. Thereafter, he was promoted to the post of Addl. Deputy Registrar (Judl. and Estt.) on 1.1.2002 and retired from service on attaining the age of superannuation while holding the said post with effect from 31.1.2002. ...
Buli Bastia (Dead), by Her L.R. Rama Chandra Bastia Vs. Dulei Das and ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Nov-02-2004
Reported in: 99(2005)CLT266
P.K. Tripathy, J.1. This appeal under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (in short, 'the Act') has been filed by the claimants as against the award passed by the Sub-ordinate Judge, Second Court, Cuttack on 29.9.1992 in L.A. Misc. Case No. 5 of 1986. The other persons who are initially assessed to the compensation are Respondent Nos. 1 to 9 (being Opp. Party Nos. 1 series and 2 to 6 in the Court below) and the L.A. Collector, Guttack is Respondent No. 10 (being Opp. Party No. 7 in the Court below).2. Ac.0.40 decimals of land from Plot No. 717 under Khata No. 306 of village Brahman Khanda under Salipur Police Station was acquired for extension of minor irrigation canal up to village Sukpaika. The land was acquired on 23.4,1968 and possession was taken on 7.1.1969. Respondent No. 10 assessed the compensation and passed the award treating the category of the land to be 'Patita'. In that award under Section 11 of the Act, Respondent No. 10 assessed the value of the land at Rs. 20...
Khusal Majhi (Dead) After Him Smt. Mali Dei and ors. Vs. Guruva Majhi ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Nov-02-2004
Reported in: 99(2005)CLT318
P.K. Mohanty, J.1. The defendants-appellants in a suit for partition are the appellants in this second appeal.2. Plaintiff's case is that suit 'B' schedule property is their joint family property in which they have got 1/4 share and that property was never partitioned among them but they are possessing separate portion of the property according to their convenience. Plaintiff's father Hariram Majhi was working as a 'Makardam' in the Railway Company and out of his own income he acquired some properties which are described in Schedule-C of the plaint. Hariram died 13 to 14 years back leaving his minor sons plaintiffs 1 to 3 and the widow Plaintiff No. 4-Khusal Majhi, Defendant No. 1 was looking after the minor sons and widow of his late brother Hariram and taking advantage of such management, he got the note of possession in his favour in respect of certain properties mentioned in Schedule-C in the current settlement. Those properties in respect of which note of possession has been made ...
Divisional Manager, Oriental Insurance Company Limited Vs. Kanaklata M ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Nov-02-2004
Reported in: 99(2005)CLT294
A.S. Naidu, J.1. The Oriental Insurance Company has preferred this Appeal assailing the judgment passed by the Third Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Puri in MACT Misc. Case No. 106/470 of 1991/1986. According to the appellant, the Insurance Company is not liable to pay the compensation of Rs. 52,900/- as the claimant was a passenger in the bus and the maximum liability of the insurer was only to Rs. 15,000/-as was prevalent at the relevant time. It is also alleged that the policy having been cancelled as the cheque bounced, the Insurance Company was not liable to pay any compensation.2. Bereft of all unnecessary details, the short facts are as follows :Admittedly, on 15.10.1986 the claimant-Respondent No. 1 was traveling in a bus bearing Registration Number OSU 9423 from Puri to Bhubaneswar on payment of hire charges. Another bus bearing Registration number ORX 5557 was proceeding ahead of the bus in which the claimant was travelling. The driver of the bus OSU 9423 wanted to over-take ...
Narayan Rath Vs. Smt. Kuntala Kumari Rath
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Nov-02-2004
Reported in: AIR2005Ori49
P.K. Tripathy, J.1. This appeal is preferred against the judgment of the learned Subordinate Judge, Puri in O. S. No. 55 of 1978-1.2. Appellant filed this Original Suit seeking a decree of divorce from the respondent in accordance with the provision in Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (in short 'the Act'). His case was that he married the respondent in 1959 and they were blessed with a daughter about four years after the marriage in 1963. Appellant discovered letters received by the respondent from her paramour Kulamani Mishra and it was apparent from the language used in those letters that she was leading an adulterous life and for that she was frequently visiting her parental house notwithstanding the resistence made by the appellant. After discovery of the letters in 1963, the respondent stayed in her parents house and in 1974, she instituted a proceeding under Section 125, Cr. P.C. registered as Misc. Case No. 77 of 1974 in the Court of J.M.F.C. Puri. She claimed for mont...
Siba Khatua and ors. Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Nov-02-2004
Reported in: 2005CriLJ1258; 2005(I)OLR217
P.K. Tripathy, J.1. Accused Siba Khatua being convicted for the offence punishable under Section 304 Part-II, I.P.C. and accused persons Kusa Khatua, Balabhadra Dehuri and Naba Khatua each having been convicted for the offence under Section 323, I.P.C. have preferred this Criminal Appeal as against the impugned judgment delivered on 31-10-1987 in Sessions Trial Case No. 38 of 1986 of the Court of Sessions Judge, Keonjhar.2. The facts and circumstances leading to the aforesaid order of conviction is noted in brief in the following manner :--It reveals from the F.I.R. that informant Chandramani (P. W. No. 1) and Gajendra (P. W. No. 2) are brothers. Laxmidhar Samal (P. W. No. 3) and Babulla (not examined) are the sons of Gajendra. The occurrence took place on 27-12-1985. That was a Friday. In the preceding Thursday night somebody pelted stones to the house of the sister of the informant. She reported it to P. W. No. 3. They were suspecting accused Siba Khatua to be the person behind that ...
Branch Manager, Oriental Ins. Co. Ltd. Vs. Gangadhar Sahoo
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Nov-01-2004
Reported in: 99(2005)CLT386
ORDERA.S. Naidu, J.1. Heard.2. The Insurance Company has filed this appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act inter alia challenging the judgment dated 17.9.2003 passed by the Third MACT, Jajpur in MAC Case No. 60 of 2000. The aforesaid MAC Case had been initiated on the basis of a claim petition filed by the present Respondent No. 1 under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act. It was averred that the claimant-respondent was the driver of the vehicle bearing Registration Number OR-02-11-2420 a Maruti Van. On 3.9.2000 while he was driving the said vehicle, the same met with an accident as a result of which he sustained fractures of his right knee and toe of his left leg. He was earning Rs. 3,000.00 per month and that due to aforesaid injuries he became fifty percent disabled. On the basis of such averments, he claimed a compensation of Rs. 1,00,000.00. After receiving notice the owner of the vehicle appeared the filed a written statement but then he did not contest the case. Th...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›