Orissa Court February 2004 Judgments
Sri Pitambar Prusty Vs. Cuttack Development Authority, Represented Thr ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Feb-26-2004
Reported in: 97(2004)CLT426
ORDER1. Heard Mr. G. K. Behera, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Mohanty, learned counsel appearing for the Cuttack Development Authority.2. The grievance of the petitioner in this writ application is that petitioner had applied for a land under Sikharpur Housing Accommodation Scheme developed by the Cuttack Development Authority and he was allotted plot No. 77B-81 measuring 60' x 40' on 15.4.1981. On 19.4.1982 the said allotment was modified and he was allotted plot No. 74/1/C measuring 50' x 60'. Accordingly, petitioner deposited Rs. 27,000/-. Finally the said allotment was also modified and he was allotted plot No. 276/SHAS in Mahanadi Vihar, Cuttack measuring 45' x 60' totalling 2700 sq. ft. Accordingly, Annexure-1 was issued by the Cuttack Development Authority which indicates that petitioner is entitled to get refund of Rs. 5451.20. According to the petitioner, while he was measuring the land allotted to him, he found that the adjacent plot owner has encroached upon his...
Tag this Judgment!Sri Prem Kumar Agrawal Vs. State of Orissa and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Feb-24-2004
Reported in: 2004(I)OLR353
ORDERP.K. Tripathy, J.1. Heard. 2. In this writ petition, petitioner prays to quash the order of suspension. Annexure-7, passed by the Collector, Bolangir on 21.11.2003, suspending the sub-wholesaler's licence of kerosene of the petitioner, which, according to Annexure-1, was renewed in March, 2001, making it valid up to 31.3.2006. A check by the Civil Supply Department to the place of business of the petitioner on kerosene oil on 22.10.2003 is not disputed. Petitioner also does not dispute to receipt of show cause on the basis of that checking made by the Civil Supply Staff. He also states that he has already submitted a show-cause. His sole grievance is that though he filed a show-cause, but the Collector, Bolangir, i.e., opposite party No.2. without affording an opportunity of hearing to him, passed the impugned order, Annexure-7, suspending his licence. Learned Standing Counsel referring to the counter affidavit filed by the opposite party members and the previous misconduct of the...
Tag this Judgment!Sri Dambarudhar Mohanta Vs. Mangulu Charan Naik and 2 ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Feb-23-2004
Reported in: AIR2004Ori126; 97(2004)CLT442; 2004(I)OLR421
ORDERP.K. Tripathy, J.1. Heard.2. This writ petition stands disposed of at the stage of admission after hearing learned counsel for the petitioner and finding no illegality in the impugned order passed by the District Judge, Keonjhar in Civil Revision No. 14 of 1994,3. Petitioner is the judgment-debtor and the opposite party No. 1 is the decree-holders in Execution Case No. 23 of 1983 of the Court of Civil Judge (Senior Division), Keonjhar. That Execution Case was dismissed for default on 25.6.1993 because of not taking requisite step by the decree-holder. On 3.2.1994 application for restoration vide M.J.C. No. 69 of 1993 filed by the petitioner was rejected by learned Civil Judge on the ground that the provision in Section 151, CPC is not applicable for restoration and that the provision under Order 21, Rule 106, CPC is applicable but the petition being barred by time the prayer for restoration cannot be allowed.4. Opposite Party No. 1 preferred Civil Revision No. 14 of 1994 against t...
Tag this Judgment!Rajanikanta Pattanayak and ors. Vs. R.S. Bedi and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Feb-23-2004
Reported in: (2004)IILLJ769Ori; 2004(I)OLR447
P.K. Mohanty, J.1. This contempt application has been filed by the writ petitioners in O.J.C. No. 1495 of 1999 and Misc. Case No. 11947 of 2001.2. The factual backdrop of the case is that the petitioners initially filed O.A. No. 30 of 1992 before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Cuttack Bench praying for regularisation in Class-III and IV posts under the Aviation Research Centre (in short 'A.R.C'), Charbatia. The Tribunal by order dated November 15, 1993 directed the opposite parties to prepare a seniority list of the petitioners and other casual labourers working under the A.R.C. and consider their case whenever the vacancies occur and to appoint persons from the said list found suitable. The petitioners having not been absorbed by the A.R.C., filed O.A. No. 349 of 1995 praying for a mandamus to implement the order dated November 15, 1999 passed in O.A. No. 30 of 1992. The opposite parties pleaded that the petitioners had been called for interview for the post of Air Craft Assista...
Tag this Judgment!Manjulata Das Vs. State of Orissa and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Feb-23-2004
Reported in: 2004(I)OLR452
S.B. Roy, C.J. 1. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner seeks to challenge the election of O.P. No. 6 to the office of Sarpanch of Orasahi Grama Panchayat under Chandbali Block in the district of Bhadrak. 2. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the constituency in question from which O. P. No. 6 was elected as Sarpanch was reserved for women candidate belonging to Scheduled Caste community. The further contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that though it is true that O.P.No. 6 is a lady, but she does not belong to any Scheduled Caste community. Despite the aforesaid disqualification, the nomination filed by O.P. No. 6 for the office in question was accepted and she was ultimately elected. Instead of raising an election dispute as provided by or under the Orissa Grama Panchayat Act, the petitioner has approached this Court directly under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 3. It is the settled position of ...
Tag this Judgment!Satyanarayan Panda Vs. Sangram Keshari Mohanty and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Feb-20-2004
Reported in: I(2005)ACC264; 2006ACJ1096; 97(2004)CLT662; 2004(I)OLR491
A.S. Naidu, J.1. This Letters Patent Appeal has been preferred by the claimant inter alia Challenging the judgment passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court in Misc. Appeal No. 76 of 1992.2. Bereft of unnecessary details, the short facts are that on 17th September, 1986 the claimant who was a college student was travelling in a town bus bearing registration number OAU 1646 in the morning from Chandinichowk to Rajabagicha. He was supposed to get down at the Khannagar Bus-stop. At that relevant stop when the claimant was about to get down, the Conductor of the bus signalled the bus to proceed before the claimant could get down, as a result of which the latter fell down on the road and the rear wheel of the bus ran over his legs. The claimant sustained grievous injuries and his legs were fractured. He was removed to the S.C.B. Medical College-Hospital, Cuttack for treatment. In spite of prolonged treatment he was not cured and became permanently disabled.3. The Second Motor Accident ...
Tag this Judgment!Gayatri Projects Ltd. Vs. State of Orissa Through the Executive Engine ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Feb-20-2004
Reported in: 2004(2)ARBLR394(Orissa); 97(2004)CLT665
Sujit Barman Roy, C.J.1. This is an application under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 praying for a declaration that the opposite party is not entitled to refer the dispute between the parties to the Orissa Arbitration tribunal, and for a further order appointing an Arbitrator and to refer the dispute between the parties in terms of the relevant arbitration Clause to the said Arbitrator for adjudication thereof.2. The petitioner dropped a tender for the work of 'Construction of Left Afflux Bundh from Rd 630-M to 1770-M of Rengali Irrigation Sub-Project W.R.C.P. Package No. 9'. The tender of the petitioner was accepted and work order was issued in favour of the petitioner, The Agreement was duly executed and signed by the parties which is at Annexure-1 to the petition. As a dispute arose between the parties, the petitioner by its letter dated 2.9.2002 made certain demand to the opposite party or to appoint an Arbitrator for referring the dispute for adjudication...
Tag this Judgment!Pranab Kishore Muduli and anr. Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Feb-20-2004
Reported in: 2004CriLJ1947
ORDERL. Mohpatra, J.1. This revision is directed against the order dated 30-10-2003 passed by the learned Asstt. Sessions Judge-cum-C.J.M., Nayagarh in S. T. Case No. 64/218 of 2002 rejecting the petition filed by the petitioners for recalling the P.Ws. 1 and 2 for further cross-examination.2. The petitioners are facing trial for commission of offences under Sections 366/376 of the Indian Penal Code. Case of the prosecution is that the victim-informant is a friend of petitioner No. 2. On 28-1-2000 she was called by the petitioner No. 2 to visit her elder sister's house. It is alleged that the victim along with petitioner No. 2 went to Bolgarh in a motor cycle driven by petitioner No. 1. At Bolgarh they remained in the house of a lawyer where from the petitioner No. 2 returned to Daspalla. When the victim-informant wanted to return to Daspalla along with petitioner No. 2, petitioner No. 1 did not allow her to go and in that night committed rape on her. The victim further alleged that sh...
Tag this Judgment!Chief General Manager, Telecom Vs. V.N. Enterprises,
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Feb-20-2004
Reported in: I(2005)BC210; 2004(I)OLR687
ORDER1. This is an application for vacating and modifying the order dated 14.1.2004 passed in Misc Case No. 216 of 2003. By the said order, the Court directed ad interim stay of further proceeding in Execution Case No. 18 of 2003 on the file of the learned Civil Judge (Sr. Divn.), Bhubaneswar until further orders subject to cash deposit of 50% of the decretal dues by the appellants in shape of demand draft and bank guarantee for the remaining amount before the executing Court.2. The respondent supplied some goods to the appellant and was paid part of the price of the goods. For the balance price, the respondent moved this Court in O.J.C. No. 5565 of 1994 which was disposed of by order dated 14.11.1995 with a direction to the appellant to pay a sum of Rs. 66,09,699.36 to the respondent. Against the order of this Court, the appellant filed a Special Leave Petition SLP (C) No. 5239 of 1995 and the Supreme Court disposed of the matter with the direction that he appellant shall pay a sum of...
Tag this Judgment!Kaya Alias Sipai Naik Vs. State of Orissa and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Feb-20-2004
Reported in: 2004(I)OLR454
L. Mohapatra, J. 1. The petitioner having been found guilty for commission of offence under Section 376 of the Penal Code and sentenced to undergo imprisonment by both the Courts below has preferred this revision. The petitioner has been convicted under Section 376 of the Penal Code for committing rape on one Smt. Chuguri alias Sonia Naik (p.w. 1) and has been sentenced to undergo R.I. for seven years. 2. The case of the prosecution is that on 31.12.1998 while the victim was digging soil in the outskirt of the village, the petitioner who was hiding in a nearby ditch forcibly dragged her to the ditch and committed rape on her. On the date of occurrence the husband of the victim was absent and he had gone to Paradeep. Therefore, the victim reported about the incident to her uncle-in-law and mother-in-law who advised her to wait till arrival of her husband. After the husband of the victim came back from Paradeep, the matter was reported to him and a village Panch was convened and since no...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »