Orissa Court March 2005 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.
Prafulla Kumar Sahoo and ors. Vs. State of Orissa and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-31-2005
Reported in: 2005(I)OLR532
ORDERA.S. Naidu, J.1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Addl.Government Advocate.2. The submission of the petitioners in this writ petition is that they were duly appointed as dealers under the Orissa Public Distribution System (Control) Order, 2002 (for short '2002 Order'). It is asserted that from the date of appointment they are discharging their duties strictly in consonance with the Rules and as per the instruction issued. Relying upon Clause 4 of the 2002 Order, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that though the petitioners had applied for renewal of their licence the authorities neither accepted the renewal application nor have passed any orders. According to the petitioners in consonance with the aforesaid 2002 Order, it is incumbent upon the authorities to accept the renewal application, consider the same in consonance with the provisions of the said order and take a decision. Not discharging such statutory duties creates prejudice to the petitio...
Mahavir Prasad Santuka and ors. Vs. Sankar Lal Tiberwal
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-31-2005
Reported in: AIR2005Ori159
M.M. Das, J1. This appeal has been preferred by the appellants who were petitioners in W.P. (C) No. 9095 of 2003.2. Facts of the case reveal that the appellants as plaintiffs filed T.S. No. 541 of 2001 in the Court of the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Ist Court, Cuttack, praying therein for a decree for permanent injunction restraining the defendant No. 1 from interfering with the construction/reconstruction/repair work of the shop rooms standing over the disputed property. The appellants filed an application for interim injunction under Order 39, Rules 1 and 2, CPC vide Misc. Case No. 311 of 2001 before the trial Court. After hearing, the learned trial Court by order dated 29-1-2002 dismissed the said Misc. Case on the finding that the appellants were tenants and defendant No. 1 being a member of the Trust Board, is the Landlord and, as such, the Landlord cannot be restrained by an order of injunction and that the Pleader Commissioner who was deputed by the learned trial Cour...
Panda Leasing and Properties Ltd. Vs. Hemant Kumar Moharana
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-30-2005
Reported in: IV(2005)BC52; 2005(I)OLR586
ORDERR.N. Biswal, J.1. Despite of receiving notice the sole opp.party did not choose to enter his appearance before the Court, so on request of the learned counsel for the petitioner, the case is heard and disposed of at the stage of admission.2. The petitioner has challenged the legality, propriety and correctness of the order dated 16.4.2004 passed by the S.D.J.M., Bhubaneswar in 1 C.C. No. 1097 of 2004 wherein he refused to accept the initial statement of the complainant-petitioner on affidavit. Learned counsel for the complainant-petitioner submits that as envisaged under Section 145(1) of the N.I. Act initial statement of a complainant can be given on affidavit. So the trial Court ought not have refused to accept the initial statement of the complainant-petitioner on affidavit. Section 145(1) of the N.I. Act reads as follows :'Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the evidence of the complainant may be given by him on affidavit and may, subjec...
Orissa Lift Irrigation Corporation Vs. Commissioner for Workmen Compen ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-30-2005
Reported in: 99(2005)CLT659
J.P. Mishra, J.1. In this Writ Application, the Orissa Lift Irrigation Corporation (In short, 'the OLIC') calls in question the legality of Annexure-3 dated 30th August, 1993 wherein the authority under the Minimum Wages Act, Balasore has directed the petitioner to pay the differential wages for the period from January, 1991 to April, 1991 to 21 Electricians (NMRs) working under the petitioner.2. The Opp. Party No. 2 being the Secretary of the Workers' Union filled claim under Section 20(2) of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948 on behalf of 21 Electricians and one Tracer claiming them to be the highly skilled category workers within the entitlement of Rs. 40/- per day. The authority accepted their plea and directed the petitioner to pay the differential amount in the category of highly skilled labourer to 21 NMR Electricians while dismissing the prayer of one NMR Tracer vide Annexure-3. It is averred that the authority committed gross error by resorting to the Order No. 2M-53/87-9283/OLIC dat...
Krushna Prasad Das Vs. Life Insurance Corporation of India and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-30-2005
Reported in: 99(2005)CLT692
P.K. Mohanty, J.1. The petitioner is an agent of the Life Insurance Corporation of India Limited (hereinafter called the 'LIC') since March, 1973 and claims to have an outstanding professional career. The petitioner calls in question the action of the Opposite Parties 1 to 3 in entertaining and processing the proposal for 'Keyman' insurance covering Opposite Party No. 5 through Opposite Party No. 4 when the proposal submitted by the petitioner for insuring Opposite Party No. 5 was pending consideration before the LIC.2. The facts in brief are that the petitioner as an agent submitted a proposal on behalf of Opposite Party No. 5 on 10.9.1987 for Keyman Insurance before the LIC, Bhubaneswar Branch. When the matter was pending consideration, the petitioner came to know that the proposal in respect of self-same Opposite Party No. 5 has been resubmitted by Opposite Party No. 4 and that has been registered for a higher sum and the matter is being processed by Opposite Party No. 3, the Branch...
Bholi Alias Bholeswar Naik Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-30-2005
Reported in: 2005CriLJ2785
ORDERP.K. Tripathy, J.1. Petitioner challenges the order of conviction under Section 307, I.P.C. passed by the Assistant Sessions Judge, Talche'r in S. T. Case No. 24-D/8 of 1988 arising out of G. R. Case No. 385 of 1987 of the Court of S. D. J. M. Talcher and the order of confirmation of that conviction and sentence as per the impugned judgment of the Sessions Judge, Dhenkanal in Criminal Appeal No. 103 of 1988.2. Prosecution case according to the F. I. R. and the investigation is that on 5-12-1987, at about 8 P.M., when the injured Hrudananda Sethi was returning from nearby Betel Shop of Damasahi Chhak along with Abhaya Pratap Das (P. W. No. 7), the accused/ petitioner came from behind and dealt two blows to the back of the head as well as on the back by the axe, M. O. I. Informant Banamali Sethi (P. W. No. 2) is the elder brother of the injured. He heard that on that date the injured picked up quarrel with father of the accused and because of that grudge the accused assaulted the sa...
Logen Kumar Samal @ Bhalu Vs. State of Orissa and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-30-2005
Reported in: 100(2005)CLT142
J.P. Mishra, J.1. The detenu Logen Kumar Samal alias Bhalu calls in question the detention order dated 17.3.2004 passed in N.S.A. Case No. 2 of 2004 (Annexure-5), order dated 22.3.2004 (Anenxure-3) and the order dated 30.4.2004 (Anenxure-4) along with the order of rejection of the Central Government.2. The case of the petitioner is that he was remanded to custody in connection with Bada Bazar P.S. Case No. 26 dated 5.3.2004 under Section 452/294/341/354/323/506/387/34, IPC corresponding to G.R. Case No. 183/04 on 10.3.2004 vide the order of the S.D.J.M., Berhampur. While in Berhampur Jail, the order of detention was communicated to him on 18.3.2004 and the same was approved by the appropriate government (State Government) on 22.3.2004 under Anenxure-3. The Advisory Board also found sufficient cause for his detention and confirmed the order under Section 12(1) of the N.S.A. Act on 30.4.2004. His representation met the same fate by the Central Government and the order was communicated to...
Babu @ Pratap Kumar Mohapatra Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-29-2005
Reported in: 2005(I)OLR574
R.N. Biswal, J.1. This revision has been preferred against the order dated 22.12.2003 passed by the S.D.J.M., Bhubaneswar in G.R. Case No. 3177 of 2003 wherein he rejected the petition filed under Section 457 Cr.P.C. by the petitioner.2. The facts in nub leading to filing of this revision is that on 20.9.2003 at about 10.30 A.M. while the Inspector-in-Charge of Badagada P.S. along with his staff was engaged in law and order duty in front of the main gate of B.J.B. College, Bhubaneswar during counting of votes polled in connection with election of members of Bhubaneswar Municipal Corporation, the petitioner wanted to enter inside the counting hall forcibly. On being detained and searched by the police personnel a country made pistol, 17 nos. of live ammunitions, one mobile phone, one voter identity card and cash of Rs. 20,835/- were recovered from his person. On demand as the petitioner could not produce any licence for possession of the fire arm, the Inspector-in-charge of Bargarh P.S....
Santosh Nayak Vs. State of Orissa and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-29-2005
Reported in: II(2005)DMC99; 2005(I)OLR642
R.N. Biswal, J.1. This revision is directed against the Order dated 9.6.2003 passed by the J.M.F.C., Purusottampur in Misc. Case No. 4 of 2003 wherein he passed an ex parte award of maintenance of Rs. 500/- per month to be paid to the wife-petitioner by the opp. party-husband from the date of application. Since the revision petition before this Court has been filed on 3.4.2004 - after 209 days of the statutory period, the petitioner herein has also filed a petition for condonation of delay under Section 5 of the Limitation Act giving rise to Misc.Case No. 444 of 2004. For the sake of convenience and just decision of the case both the Misc case and the revision petition were heard together on consent of the parties and the following Order is passed thereon.2. As per the averment made in the petition under Section 5 of the Limitation Act in Misc. Case No. 444 of 2004 the revision-petitioner had not received any notice in Misc.Case No. 4 of 2003. So he could not know about filing of the p...
Anil Kumar Agrawal Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-29-2005
Reported in: 2005(I)OLR640
R.N. Biswal, J.1. This revision is directed against the Order dated 18.11.2004 passed by the J.M.F.C., Kantabanji in G.R. case No. 239 of 2004 wherein he rejected the petition filed under Section 457 Cr.P.C. and refused to release the Mini-truck bearing Registration No. OR-03-7695 in favour of the petitioner.2. The nub of the facts leading to filing of this revision is that on 15.9.2004 at about 5 P.M. getting reliable information that the aforesaid truck was being loaded with rice at Bangomunda Block godown for illegal transaction the A.S.I. of Bangomunda P.S. made station diary entry to that effect and rushed to the block office to find that the truck with loaded rice had already left for Kantabanji. He pursued the truck and intercepted it on the P.W.D. road in between Bangomunda and Kantabanji. On inspection of the truck 144 sacks each containing 50 K.Gs. of rice were found therein. On demand of document if any, in respect of transportation of the rice the driver Kashinath Pradhan p...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »