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.
Radhaballav Mohanty Vs. State of Orissa and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-29-2005
Reported in: 100(2005)CLT527; 2005(I)OLR507
A.S. Naidu, J.1. This petition has been filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act inter alia praying for condonation of delay in filing Review Petition No. 25 of 2005.After being unsuccessful before the Supreme Court in Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No. 183 of 2003, the petitioner approached this Court by filing a Review Petition under Section 114 of the Code of Civil Procedure, registered as Review Petition No. 25 of 2005, inter alia, praying to review the judgment of this Court passed on 11th December, 2002 in OJC No. 7646 of 1998. On verification, the Stamp Reporter has pointed out that there is a delay of two years and fifty-eight days in preferring the Review Petition. The present application has been filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act read with Rule 27(A) of Chapter VI of the Orissa High Court Rules with a prayer to condone the delay in filing the Review Petition and to hear the Review Petition on merit.2. In para-5 of the Misc.Case it is asserted that though the app...
Gunanidhi Sahoo Vs. Chief Engineer, Buildings and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-29-2005
Reported in: AIR2005Ori166
M.M. Das, J.1. The petitioner, in this writ application, alleges that the opposite parties 1 and 2 have arbitrarily and illegally accepted the tender of the opposite party No. 3 for the work to be executed as per the notice inviting tender under Annexure-1 and the petitioner has been illegally eliminated though he was eligible to participate in the tender process.2. The petitioner has prayed in the writ application to quash the decision of the opposite parties 1 and 2 to award the work in favour of opposite party No. 3 for repair, renovation and improvement of Academic Block of Ravenshaw College, Cuttack.3. The case of the petitioner is that by the tender notice issued by opposite party No. 2, for execution of the work of repair, renovation and improvement of Academic Block of Ravenshaw College, Cuttack, Special and Super Class Contractors having valid licence to that effect and ownership certificate of possessing required equipments and machineries for the building works, were eligibl...
Baidyanath Naik Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-28-2005
Reported in: 2005(I)OLR746
1. Appellant was convinced by learned Sessions Judge, Mayurbhanj, Baripada in S.T. Case No. 112 of 1994 and sentenced to under go imprisonment for life for the offence under Section 302, I.P.C. Appellant has challenged that order of conviction from the jail and that is how the appeal has been registered as a Jail Criminal Appeal.2. Samal Naik (hereinafter referred to as 'the deceased') suffered a homicidal death because of some ante mortem injuries which he sustained at about 7 p.m. on 03.12.1993. Hari Nayak (P.W.5) is the father of the said deceased. He was the informant in the case. According to the case of the prosecution, the deceased, a bachelor, was living separately from his father and three brothers, but taking his food in the joint family. He was having some relationship with Sabita Naik @ Jhari (P.W.2). The said P.W.2 is the daughter of the accused. The proposal for marriage of the deceased with P.W.2 given by P.W.5 was turned down by the accused. It is alleged that on the da...
State of Orissa Vs. Kabi Sankar Malu
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-23-2005
Reported in: 100(2005)CLT4; 2005(II)OLR20
P.K. Tripathy, J.1. This Government Appeal has been registered to scrutinize and find out the correctness of the order of acquittal on benefit of doubt granted by the Learned First Additional Sessions Judge, Puri to the accused/respondent in S.T. Case No. 52/266 of 1992 arising out of G.R. Case No. 70 of 1992 of the Court of S.D.J.M., Puri relating to offence under Section 21 of the Narcotic Drug Psychotropic Substances Act, 1995 (in short 'the N.D.P.S. Act') on the allegation of the accused being found in possession of 306 Milligrams of heroin in 9 packets, which was the grass weight.2. The case of the prosecution is that on 19.2.1992 at about 1.30 P.M. Shri Kalakar Sha, the then in-charge of the Temple Out Post, Puri Town on getting reliable informations about the accused selling heroin inside the Temple of Lord Jagannath at Puri, he made a Station Diary entry and conducted raid. Inside the temple premises, he chased and caught hold of accused/respondent who on the sight of the said ...
State of Orissa Vs. Kanhu Mohapatra and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-23-2005
Reported in: 2005CriLJ3361
P.K. Tripathy, J.1. This appeal has been preferred against the order of acquittal granted in favour of the accused-respondents by learned Assistant Sessions Judge-cum-Chief Judicial Magistrate, Puri on 23-7-1986 in S.T. Case No. 1 /2 of 1986 arising out of G.R. Case No. 1026 of 1984 of the Court of Sub-divisional Judicial Magistrate, Puri.2. According to the case of the prosecution, there was ill-feeling between the accused persons and Lokanath Das (P.W. No. 2). On 30-8-1984, while P.W. No. 2 accompanied by P.Ws. 1 and 3, each occupying separate bi-cycles were going on the public road leading to Brahmagiri, at about 8.30 p.m. near Puri-Nimapara Co-operative Bank, the three accused persons came and attempted to commit murder of P.W. No. 2. According to the allegations of the prosecution, respondents 1 and 2 dealt respectively Farsa blows on his right hand and on his face. Accused sustained bleeding injuries and fell down at the spot. Accused persons, who were three in number fled away f...
Government of Orissa and ors. Vs. Prafulla Kumar Patnaik and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-22-2005
Reported in: 100(2005)CLT100
M.M. Das, J.1. In this Writ Application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the Government of Orissa in its Water Resources Department being the petitioner has challenged the judgment and award passed by the Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal, Orissa, Bhubaneswar in Industrial Dispute Case No. 66 of 1994.2. The facts as revealed discloses that the names of opposite parties 1 to 7 workmen were sponsored by the concerned employment exchange for being appointed in the post of hand drillers in the scale of pay of Rs. 100-155/- with usual D.A. and A.D.A. However, by appointment orders dated 3.10.1972 and 13.10.1972, they were appointed as hand drillers, on being selected in an interview in the office of the Hydrologist Lift Irrigation, Bhubaneswar. It is the case of the workmen that in the orders of appointment, the scale of pay was mentioned as Rs. 80-120/- instead of Rs. 100-155/-. However, the workmen joined in the said posts of hand drillers, with protest. The scale of p...
Smt. Bijaya Lakshmi Kundingi Vs. Kamala Lochana Kundingi
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-22-2005
Reported in: AIR2005Ori120; 100(2005)CLT88; II(2005)DMC575; 2005(II)OLR23
M.M. Das, J.1. This Second Appeal has been preferred by the appellant-wife against the confirming judgment. The appeal was admitted by this Court on the following substantial question of law :'The appellant-wife having obtained decree for restitution of conjugal rights, the husband-respondent was not entitled to any decree for dissolution without establishing that he made attempts to comply with the decree for restitution of conjugal rights passed against him, but could not do so because of the conduct of the wife and there being no such finding by any of the courts below, the decree is not sustainable in law.'2. In order to appreciate the respective case of the parties, it is necessary to narrate ,the facts of the case which are as follows:The appellant-wife had married the husband-respondent according to the Hindu Customs and Rites in the year, 1976. Being ill-treated by the husband and having discovered that the husband has developed illicit relationship with one B. Varalaxmi, when ...
State Vs. Sk. Lokman Alli and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-21-2005
Reported in: 99(2005)CLT553; 2005(II)OLR15
P.K. Mohanty, J.1. This is an appeal against the order of acquittal dated 23.1.1986 passed by the Learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Balasore acquitting the accused persons from the charges under Sections 323/325/225/34 read with Section 447, IPC and Section 5 of the Indian Explosives Act.2. The main thrust of the argument of the Learned Addl. Government Advocate is that the Learned Trial Court has wrongly rejected the evidence of P.W. 3 and his son P.W. 4 on the ground that their statements are not corroborated by independent witnesses, specially when the evidence with regard to the injury on the person of P.W. 4 has been corroborated by the Doctor examined as P.W. 2 in all material particulars. It is further submitted that in view of the evidence of P.W. 3 and his son P.W. 4 corroborated by the evidence of the Doctor P.W. 2, the Trial Court ought to have recorded the order of conviction.3. The prosecution story, in short, was that on 1.11.1980 at about 9.30 P.M., while P.W. ...
State of Orissa Vs. Govindaram Rathore
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-21-2005
Reported in: 2005(II)OLR12
P.K. Mohanty, J.1. This appeal is against the order of acquittal passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Cuttack acquitting the accused-respondent from the charge under Section 353 I.P.C. in G.R. Case No. 3327 of 1983/ Trial Case No. 256 of 1984.2. The prosecution case in brief is that a non-bailable warrant of arrest was issued against the accused in G.R. Case No. 1568 of 1970 by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Cuttack, but the accused was avoiding police arrest since long. On 29.12.1983 at about 3.00 a.m., the informant S.I. of Police of Mangalabag Police Station alongwith Head Constable and two other constables of the said Police Station went to the house of the accused for executing the non-bailable warrant of arrest issued against him. On being called, the accused came out of the house and challenged the authority of the informant to call him in the night. After explaining the contents of the non-bailable warrant when the informant, S.I. of Police, aske...
Krupasindhu Sethy and ors. Vs. Director of Consolidation and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Mar-18-2005
Reported in: 2005(II)OLR9
A.S. Naidu, J.1. As the subject matter and the point of law involved in these two cases are same, the cases were heard together and are disposed of by this common judgment.2. The order dated 8th July, 2003 passed by the Director, Consolidation, Orissa, Cuttack in Revision Petition Nos. 5992/ 1999 and 5490/2002 are assailed in both the writ petitions. The said revisions were filed by opposite party No. 2 invoking jurisdiction Under Section 37(2) of the Orissa Consolidation of Holdings and Prevention of Fragmentation of Land Act, 1972 (hereinafter called the Consolidation Act). The dispute arises out of two objection cases filed by opposite party No. 2 before the Asst. Consolidation Officer, Puri Circle and which were registered as Objection Case Nos. 1200/1992 and 1041/1992. The main grievance of the objector, opposite party No. 2, was that there is discrepancy in the area of Plot No. 513 and the same should be enhanced from Ac.0.10 decs to Ac.0.11 decs and that to plot No. 516 from Ac....
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »