Orissa Court July 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.
Dibyakanta Dash Vs. the Commissioner of Endowments and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-06-2004
Reported in: 98(2004)CLT221
ORDERA.K. Patnaik, J.1. Heard Mr. S.P. Misra, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. A.K. Rath, learned counsel appearing for the Commissioner of Endowments.2. The case of the petitioner in this writ petition is that he is the hereditary trustee-Marfatdar of Sri Hanuman Jew, Sri Astasambhu Mahadev, Maa Parbati, Sri Mangala Thakurani, Sri Maa Tarini. Sri Prinath Dev & Sri Radhakrishna Jew Temple. By order dated 27.8.2002, the Addl. Asst. Commissioner of Endowments, Cuttack has appointed Sri Rabinarayan Patra, Sri Birandra Pratap Swain, Sri Pravajan Pattanaik, Sri Bankim Behari Pattanaik and Sri Chiranjibi Datta as interim non-hereditary trustees of the aforesaid temple under Section 27 of the Orissa Hindu Religious Endowments Act 1951 for a period of two years from the date of this order. Aggrieved by the said order dated 27.8.2002 passed by the Addl. Asst. Commissioner of Endowments, Cuttack the petitioner has filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution with a pr...
Sri Darasingh Kumbhar Vs. State of Orissa Represented by the Collector ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-06-2004
Reported in: 98(2004)CLT460
ORDERP.K. Tripathy, J.1. The LCR is available and both the parties agree for disposal of the writ petition at the stage of admission.2. Heard.3. Opposite Party No. 2 filed an Election Petition in the Court of Civil Judge (Junior Division), Sonepur under Section 30 of Orissa Gram Panchayat Act, 1965 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), challenging to the election of the petitioner as the Sarpanch of Baladi Gram Panchayat held on 19.2.2002. In that petition Opp. Party No. 2 inter alia advanced the plea that petitioner is disqualified to be a-Sarpanch because his third child i.e. Pragati was born in 1998 and therefore provision in Clause (v) of Sub-section (1) of Section 25 read with provision in Clause (a) of Sub-section (2) of Section 25 of the Act is enforceable against him. Petitioner defended the case by stating that his third child i.e. the daughter Pragati was born on 31.3.1995 and therefore, even if he has three children he is not disqualified to continue as Sarpanch.4. Both th...
Food Corporation of India Vs. Commissioner of Sales Tax and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-05-2004
Reported in: 98(2004)CLT273; [2005]142STC464(Orissa)
A. K. Patnaik, J.1. For the year 1974-75, the petitioner was assessed to extra tax in the assessment made under Section 12(4) of the Orissa Sales Tax Act, 1947 (for short, 'the Act'). A penalty was also demanded from the petitioner for the said period under Section 9-6(3) of the said Act. Against the said demands of extra tax and penalty the petitioner filed an appeal before the Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax and the Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax remanded the case back for reassessment after setting aside the assessment and the order of penalty. Aggrieved by the said order passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax, petitioner filed Second Appeal No. 159 of 1980-81 before the Sales Tax Tribunal, Orissa. By order dated 16.9.1981, the Sales Tax Tribunal, Orissa allowed the appeal in part and directed the assessing officer to make reassessment keeping in view the direction given by the Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax in the connected first appeal and also keeping in ...
Karam Chand Mukhi and ors. Vs. Santosh Pradhan and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-05-2004
Reported in: 2004CriLJ4380
ORDERP.K. Tripathy, J.1. Heard.2. This application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short, 'the Code') stands disposed of at the stage of admission, on hearing learned counsel for the petitioners, accused-opposite party No. 1 and learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the State.3. The point of controversy, which has arisen in this case, is not a common feature which is experienced generally in usual course of a sessions trial. To appreciate that the fact situation relevant for the purpose, is succinctly noted :Opposite party No. 1 as the sole accused is facing trial in S.T. Case No. 14 of 2002, pending in the Court of C.J.M.-cum-Asstt., Sessions Judge, Phulbani. Charge for the offences under Sections 376/306, I.P.C. has been framed. In November, 2002 learned Additional Prosecutor filed an application to examine four persons as witnesses on behalf of the prosecution outside that list of charge-sheeted witnesses. Petitioners are three out of them. Le...
Pini @ Nrupendra Kumar Sai and anr. Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-02-2004
Reported in: 98(2004)CLT220
ORDERM.M. Das, J. 1. This is an application filed under Section 482, Cr.P.C. jointly by the informant as well as the accused in respect of Brajarajnagar P.S. Case No. 88 of 2004 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 437 of 2004 pending in the file of S.D.J.M., Jharsuguda. The alleged offence is under Sections 341, 323, 355, 294, 506/34, IPC read with Section 3 of the S.C. and S.T. (P.A.) Act.2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Addl. Standing Counsel.3. Learned counsel for the petitioners relying upon a decision reported in (2004) 27 OCR 127, S.K. Khariar @ Sk. Khairal and Ors. v. Kanhu Bar, submits that since the matter has been compromised between both parties, the ratio of the said decision is squarely applicable to this case and the proceeding is necessary to be quashed.4. From the said decision it transpires that a joint affidavit was filed in that case both by the complainant and the accused and this Court held that since the dispute has been settled between the p...
Vijay Power Generators Ltd. Vs. Reserve Bank of India and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-02-2004
Reported in: 98(2004)CLT150
B.P. Das, J.1. Both these writ petitions filed by M/s. Vijay Power Generators Limited being inter-linked were heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.2. In W.P.(C) No. 5693/2003 the petitioner has prayed for a declaration that the award of contract pursuant to the tender notice, Annexure-1, for supply, installation, testing and commissioning of 380 KVA Diesel Generator set for the Main Office Building of the Reserve Bank of India in Bhubaneswar in favour of O.P. No. 3 is illegal and further for a direction to O.P. Nos. 1 and 2 to award the said contract in favour of the petitioner.While issuing notice on the writ petition on 13.6.2003 this Court passed an interim order to the effect that in case O.P. No. 3 has not supplied the goods pursuant to the tender notice, Annexure-1, the supply of goods by the said O.P. No. 3 would not be accepted by the R.B.I.-O.P. Nos. 1 and 2. During pendency of this case [W.P.(C) No. 5693/2003], the Bank-O.P. Nos. 1 and 2 considerin...
Pitabash Alias Pitambar Mahakud and ors. Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-02-2004
Reported in: 2004CriLJ4034
B.P. Das, J.1. This Criminal Appeal is directed against an order of the Sessions Judge, Keonjhar in S.T. No. 102 of 1992 convicting the appellants for the offence under Sections 148, 302/149 and 323/149, Indian Penal Code (in short the 'I.P.C.') and sentencing all of them to undergo R.I. for life under Sections 302/149, I.P.C. Learned Sessions Judge has not passed any separate sentence for conviction under Sections 148 and 323/149, I.P.C.2. The brief facts as per the F.I.R. are that on 23-3-1992 at about 9 a.m. PW 1 namely, Sankhali Barik lodged an F.I.R. before the O.I.C., Joda Police Station disclosing therein that on the date of occurrence at about 8 a.m. while he was coming from his village Bamebari, on the way he saw his uncle's son Umakanta Barik lying dead in an open field belonging to one Pitabasa Mahakud and there were several cut injuries on the head and face of deceased Umakanta. He also found his uncle Biswanath laying dead in a pool of blood at a little distance from the p...
Ramanandan Prasad Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-02-2004
Reported in: 2004CriLJ4366
A.S. Naidu, J.1. The appellant who was working as Senior Clerk-cum-Cashier in Utkalmani Gopabandhu Institute of Engineering, Rourkela has impugned the judgment dated 27th January, 1996 passed by the learned Special Judge (Vig). Sambhalpur in T.R. Case No. 33 of 1989 convicting him under Section 5(1)(c) read with Section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 and Sections 409 and 477-A of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years on each count and directing the sentences to run concurrently.2. Prosecution case in short is that the appellant was working as Senior Clerk-cum-Cashier in the Utkalmani Gopabandhu Institute of Engineering at Rourkela from 14-5-1986 to 5-1-1987. During that period he had been assigned the work of maintaining account books of the office and keeping, receiving and paying cash of the Institute. He falsified the accounts and committed misappropriation of funds of the Institute to a tune of Rs. 50,217.15. After...
Naba Diganta Educational Trust Vs. Managing Director, Idco and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-02-2004
Reported in: 2005(I)OLR575
ORDERM.M. Das, J.1. Though this matter was listed for further orders on Misc. Case No. 225 of 2004 filed by the appellant-petitioner for an interim order of injunction, with consent of parties, the same is taken up for final disposal.2. Heard Mr. Mohapatra, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. Mukherjee, learned Senior Counsel on behalf of the respondents. The respondents have entered appearance by filing a caveat petition.3. The present appeal has been filed against the impugned under dated 13.5.2004 passed in I.A. No. 150 of 2004 arising out of C.S. No. 212 of 2004 pending in the Court of Civil Judge, Senior Division, Bhubaneswar. By the said order the learned trial Court has rejected the application of the appellant-petitioner filed under Order 39, Rules 1 and 2 C.P.C. for an order of interim injunction during pendency of the suit. The appellant as plaintiff has filed a suit for declaration of right, title, interest and confirmation of possession and for permanent injunction ag...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›