Orissa Court June 2004 Judgments
Pradeep Kumar Medini Roy Vs. State of Orissa and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jun-28-2004
Reported in: 2004CriLJ3655
A.K. Patnaik, J.1. The question to be decided in this writ petition is whether the High Court in exercise of its powers under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India should quash the charge-sheet filed in Court after completion of investigation by the police and direct the C. B. I. to re-investigate into the case in the facts and circumstances of this case.2. An F. I. R. was lodged by one Padma Lochan Sahu in Nilgiri P.S. alleging that Kumari Anitarani Sahu, the daughter of his brother late Purna Chandra Sahu, who was a minor aged about 13 years, had been raped and murdered between 10 a.m. and 11 a.m. on 17-6-1995. It was alleged in the F. I. R. that Kumari Anitarani Sahu had gone to take bath in Nua Pokhari with his brother Jogeswar Sahu. She kept her dresses and soap on the tank embankment and went to Rajabagicha to attend to the call of the nature. When she did not return for more than half an hour, Jogeswar returned home and informed his mother and thereafter her mother s...
Tag this Judgment!South Eastern Railway Hotel and anr. Vs. Orissa State Pollution Contro ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jun-25-2004
Reported in: 2004CriLJ3643
ORDERL. Mohapatra, J.1. This revision is directed against the order of conviction and sentence passed by the Courts below wherein the petitioner No. 2 as Manager of Petitioner No. 1 has been convicted for commission of offence under Section 41(2) of the Water (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 (hereinafter called 'the Act') and has also been sentenced to simple imprisonment for one and half years as well as fine of Rs. 5,000/-in default to undergo simple imprisonment for one month.2. From the record, it appears that notice was issued on the question of admission and a direction was also issued for disposal of the revision at the admission stage. In view of such earlier direction issued by this Court, the case was taken up for hearing and disposal at the stage of admission.3. The complainant is Orissa State Pollution Control Board and the case of the complainant is that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 16 of 1991 issued a direction on 9-1-1995 to the com...
Tag this Judgment!Sri Pratap Singh Ray Jagadev Vs. Bhubaneswar Development Authority and ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jun-24-2004
Reported in: 98(2004)CLT453
A.K. Patnaik, J. 1. The case of the petitioner in this writ petition is that the Bhubaneswar Development Authority (for short, 'the BDA') allotted two houses, HIG 1/69 and HIG 1/70 in the Kapila Prasad Housing Scheme on 18.1.1994 to the Opp. Party No. 2. As per the said housing scheme, the Opp. Party No. 2 deposited a sum of Rs. 4,65,408/- with the BDA towards the earnest money. Under the said scheme, the sale price of each of the house was fixed at Rs. 3,30,000/- for out-right purchase and at Rs. 4,84,500/- for purchase in instalments. The Opp. Party No. 2 opted to pay the price in instalments. The Opp. Party No. 2 took possession of the two houses on 13.10.1999 but he found several deficiencies in the two houses. He wrote to the Vice-Chairman of the BDA on 23.10.1999 to make necessary repairs and replacement but the repairs and replacement were not done by the BDA. The further case of the petitioner is that the Opp. Party No. 2 appointed Opp, Party No. 3 as authorised agent for enter...
Tag this Judgment!National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Prafulla Kumar Mohanty and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jun-24-2004
Reported in: IV(2005)ACC166
A.S. Naidu, J.1. This Letters Patent Appeal has been filed by the appellant Insurance Company inter alia challenging the judgment dated 11 th July, 2001 passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court in Miscellaneous Appeal No. 430 of 1996.2. Respondent No. 1 Prafulla Kumar Mohanty, Senior Clerk of the District Judge's Court at Berhampur, while travelling in a car bearing registration number AAS 4005 with his family from Puri to his village on 28th April, 1990, the car met with an accident at about 8 a.m. near village Palia, Chatrapur on NH-V. Consequent thereof, there was dislocation of the hip joint and right tibia of respondent No. 1. He filed a claim case before the 2nd Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Berhampur for compensation of a tune of Rs. 4,98,782.62. The said claim case was registered as M.A.C. No. 13 of 1991 (451/90). The Tribunal after a vivid discussion of the evidence, both oral and documentary, awarded compensation in favour of respondent No. 1 under different heads as ...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Gitanjali Bisoi Vs. Smt. Bidyulata Muduli and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jun-24-2004
Reported in: 100(2005)CLT155
L. Mohapatra, J.1. This Election Appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 10th November, 2003 passed in M.J.C. No. 52 of 2002 declaring the Election of the appellant to be illegal, void and unconstitutional and also declaring respondent No. 1 elected as Member, Zilla Parishad, Girila Zone, Kotpad-2.Respondent No. 1 was the election-petitioner before the Learned District Judge, Koraput and she had filed an application under Section 32 of the Zilla Parishad Act for declaration that the election of Respondent No. 1 as Member, Zilla Parishad, Girila Zone, Kotpad-2 held on 21.2.2002 is illegal, void and unconstitutional and consequently for declaring the election-petitioner elected for the said post.2. The case of the election-petitioner is that as per the election programme, election was scheduled to be held in the year 2002 and nominations were filed on 21.1.2002. The nomination papers were scrutinized on 22.2.2002 and after the election, results were finally published on 2...
Tag this Judgment!Ram Kishan Rajkumar Vs. Assessing Authority and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jun-23-2004
Reported in: [2005]139STC450(Orissa)
1. Heard Mr. A. Mohanty, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Narasingha, learned Additional Standing Counsel (C.T.).2. In this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the assessment order under the Orissa Entry Tax Act, 1999 for the period 2000-2001 on the grounds, inter alia, that the petitioner was not given a reasonable opportunity of proving the correctness and completeness of the return submitted by him in accordance with the provisions of Sub-section (4) of Section 7 of the Orissa Entry Tax Act, 1999.3. On May 10, 2004 this Court has passed orders requesting the Additional Standing Counsel (C.T.) to produce the records to show that an opportunity was given to the petitioner in terms of the proviso to Sub-section (4) of Section 7 of the Orissa Entry Tax Act, 1999 before the impugned order was passed by the assessing authority. Pursuant to the said order dated May 10, 2004, the assessment records have been produced by Mr. Narasingha, Additional Standing Counsel (C.T.).4...
Tag this Judgment!Srikanta Panda and ors. Vs. State of Orissa and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jun-21-2004
Reported in: 98(2004)CLT584
ORDERA.K. Patnaik, J.1. Writ Petition W.P.(C) No. 6587 of 2002 was filed as a Public Interest Litigation by 10 petitioners on behalf of the general public of Salipur area. The petitioners have stated in the writ petition that a proposal for widening the State Highway connecting Jagatpur (Cuttack) and Chandbali had been finalized since long. But this project of widening the State Highway could not be executed because of unauthorized encroachments on the road side Government lands by different' persons and shopkeepers mainly at Salipur and Nischintakoili areas. In the writ petition, the petitioners have further stated that most of the encroachers have approached different Courts of law and have obtained stay orders against their eviction through encroachment proceedings. A statement of such unauthorized encroachments and the cases pending in Civil Courts and this Court filed by the so-called encroachers has been furnished in Annexure 1 to the writ petition. The petitioners have narrated ...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Sabitri Das Vs. Gangadhar Naik and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jun-18-2004
Reported in: 98(2004)CLT70
P.K. Tripathy, J.1. In the above noted Civil Revisions argument was heard separately on different dates but in all such cases the common question of law involved is relating to their maintainability in view of Amendment of Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (in short 'the Code') by Act 46 of 1999 which came into force with effect from July 1st 2002. Thus, this common judgment shall abide the result on the question of maintainability of each of such Civil Revisions.2. C. R. No. 370 of 2000:Defendant No. 5 of O.S. No. 141 of 1983 of the Court of Munsif (Civil Judge, Junior Division), Balasore filed Misc. Case No. 350 of 1990 under Order 9, Rule 13, CPC to set aside the decree which was passed ex-parte against her. That Misc. case was dismissed on merit on 22.8.1992. She preferred Misc. Case Appeal No. 39 of 1992. Learned District Judge, Balasore, as per the impugned judgment passed on 20.7.2000 dismissed that appeal. As against that order, the said defendant No. 5 has filed...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Sarasa Patra and anr. Vs. Ch. Kashinath Patra
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jun-18-2004
Reported in: 98(2004)CLT230
P.K. Tripathy, J. 1. This writ petition has been filed challenging to the legality and the correctness of the order passed by the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Bhubaneswar on 21.4.2001 in Title Suit No. 208 of 1996 and the confirming judgment delivered on 11.10.2002 by the Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court No. 2, Bhubaneswar in C.R. No. 15/5 of 2002.2. Petitioners are the plaintiffs and the opposite party is the defendant in Title Suit No. 208 of 1996. Plaintiff No. 1 is the wife and plaintiff No. 2 is the son of the defendant. Plaintiffs have filed the aforesaid suit inter alia for the declaration that defendant is not entitled to evict them from the suit house or to sell it to strangers and to permanently injunct him in that respect. Plaintiffs filed Misc. Case No. 220 of 1996 under Order 39, Rules 1 and 2, C.P.C. for temporary injunction. Notwithstanding the objection of the defendant that the suit property is his self acquired property and he has every right to alienate ...
Tag this Judgment!Branch Manager, Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. and Divisional Manager ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jun-18-2004
Reported in: I(2005)ACC36; 2006ACJ475; 98(2004)CLT280
P.K. Mohanty, J.1. In these two appeals, the Insurer-companies challenge the awards of the Workmen's Compensation Commissioner under the Workmen's Compensation Act. The common question of law being involved in both the appeals, on the prayer made and agreement of the learned counsel for the parties, they are taken up together for hearing and disposed of by this common judgment.2. In Misc. Appeal No. 849 of 1999, the Branch Manager, Oriental Insurance Company Ltd., Sambalpur challenges the order of the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation-cum-Assistant Labour Commissioner, Sambalpur in W. C. Case No. 39 of 1998 in an application under Section 22 of the Workmen's Compensation Act and a sum of Rs. 1,88,705/- as compensation to be paid within 15 days, failing which the amount was to carry 12% interest thereon per annum.3. The main challenge to the award is on the ground that the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation (hereinafter called as 'the Commissioner') could not have recorded a ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »