Orissa Court October 2006 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.
Bijaya Kumar Jena and ors. Vs. Binapani Jethi @ Barik
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Oct-25-2006
Reported in: 103(2007)CLT114
L. Mohapatra, J.1. Defendants 1 to 3 have filed this writ application challenging the order dated 27.9.2004 passed by the Learned Adhoc Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court No. II, Cuttack in T.S. No. 146 of 2001 rejecting one of the applications filed for amendment of the written statement. From the impugned order it appears that two applications were filed for amendment of the written statement i.e. on 29.7.2004 and 1.9.2004 respectively. The first application for amendment filed on 29.7.2004 was allowed and the second application filed on 1.9.2004 was rejected.2. The suit has been filed for partition of the suit properties described in the Schedule 'B' and the Plaintiff claims 1/4th share in the said schedule properties. The other prayer in the suit is for delivery of possession of the share that may be allowed to the Plaintiff through process of Court. The case of the Plaintiff is that she is the daughter of Dijabar Jethi and Defendants 1 and 2 are sons of said Dijabar Jethi...
United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Charan Biswal and Three ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Oct-25-2006
Reported in: 2007(1)OLR202
ORDERL. Mohapatra, J.1. All the three appeals are directed against the judgment and award dated 15th May, 2004 passed by the 1st Additional District Judge-cum-1st M.A.C.T. Cuttack in Misc. Case No. 835 of 1998 directing that payment of compensation of. Rs. 4,25,000/- be equally shared by both the Insurance Companies along with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of filing of the claim petition till realization. M.A.C.A. No. 346 of 2004 has been filed by the United India Insurance Company Limited challenging the award whereas M.A.C.A. No. 495 of 2004 has been filed by the New India Assurance Company Limited challenging the said award. The claimant has filed M.A.C.A. No. 462 of 2004 praying for enhancement of compensation.2. The case of the claimant is that on 23.7.1998, at about 5 P.M., while he was going from Niali to his village Athantara in a trekker bearing registration No. OR-05A-3813, near Niali Block Office, a tractor bearing registration No. OR-05-1930 attached wi...
New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Tara Pradhan and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Oct-25-2006
Reported in: 103(2007)CLT470
ORDERN. Prusty, J.1. Heard2. Mr. Rao, Learned Counsel for the Appellant and Mr. B.R Roy, Learned Counsel for the Respondent No. 1.3. This application has been filed for condonation of delay since there is a delay of 334 days in filing of the appeal.4. When this matter is taken up, Learned Counsel for the Appellant submits that since there is a delay in filing of the appeal and an application for condonation of delay has been filed, as usual notice may be issued to the Respondents on the question of limitation and thereafter-appropriate order may be passed in the matter.5. Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of Respondent No. 1 submits that in this case the award was passed on 22.05.1998 and he appeal was filed on 19.07.1999, i.e. after about one year two months from the date of award with a delay of 334 days. No application for condonation of delay was filed along with memorandum of appeal intentionally to frustrate the benefit of the award passed by the Tribunal in favour of the claim...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Biju Patnaik (Deced.) (by Lr. Prem Patn ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Oct-25-2006
Reported in: [2007]289ITR406(Orissa)
A.K. Ganguly, J.1. These six miscellaneous cases being Miscellaneous Cases Nos. 1 to 6 of 2004 under Section 151 of the Civil Procedure Code (hereinafter called, 'the Code'), were filed by the Revenue in S.J.C. Nos. 211 to 216 of 1971 (CIT v. Biju Patnaik : [1991]190ITR396(Orissa) ) which were disposed of by a Division Bench of this High Court on August 1, 1990.2. In all the miscellaneous cases identical prayer was made and the said prayer is set out below:It is therefore prayed that this hon'ble court may be pleased to allow this application and be further pleased to direct the Tribunal to conclude the assessment in terms of the order of the apex court and the order of this hon'ble court dated August 1, 1990.Alternatively this hon'ble court may be pleased to issue suitable directions for giving effect to the order of the apex court.Any other order/orders that may deem fit and proper be passed in the facts and circumstances of this case.3. The facts of the case span over more than four...
Kalinga Foundation Trust Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Oct-25-2006
Reported in: [2008]296ITR733(Orissa); [2009]179TAXMAN39(Orissa)
A.K. Ganguly, J.1. This writ petition has been filed by Kalinga Foundation Trust, which was heard along with the miscellaneous cases. On the factual aspect, there is a great deal of common area between the writ petition and those miscellaneous cases. In the course of argument it was admitted by learned Counsel for the parties that save and except prayer No. (iii) nothing remains to be considered in the writ petition. The said prayer No. (iii) is set out below:(iii) after hearing the parties direct opposite party No. 1 to grant approval to the petitioner under Section 80G of the Income-tax Act, and/or.2. Learned Counsel for the Revenue submits that the said prayer No. (iii) cannot be granted since the same is subjudice before the Appellate Tribunal.3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner has referred to an order passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-I, Bhubaneswar. In the said order, the relevant facts of the case which formed the subject matter of miscellaneous cases were al...
State of Orissa Vs. Subash Chandra Rath
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Oct-20-2006
Reported in: 103(2007)CLT280; 2006(II)OLR831
Sujit Barman Roy, C.J.1. Respondent Subash Chandra Rath was at the relevant point of time appointed as Veterinary Asst. Surgeon at Belpahar. He was accused for having taken a bribe of Rs. 200/- for giving a false certificate regarding the value of certain buffalo. The alleged incident occurred on 2.8.1986. Since then, little more than two decades' time has elapsed. The amount of bribe allegedly taken by the respondent was for a paltry sum of Rs. 200/-. Such conduct of the respondent must be highly deprecated when it is done by a responsible officer of the Government, namely, the Veterinary Asst. Surgeon. But, as a long a time has elapsed since the occurrence had taken place and the appeal was filed in the year 1994 and since then, more than 12 years' time has elapsed, and for this inordinate delay in disposing of the appeal the Court cannot lay blame on the respondent, I am of the view that it would be a sheer travesty of justice to alter the finding of acquittal at this belated stage....
Luna Alias Chandra Sekhar Sahoo, Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Oct-20-2006
Reported in: 103(2007)CLT266; 2007(I)OLR84
Pradip Mohanty, J.1. These three appeals arise out of the judgment and order dated 22.07.2002 passed by the Assistant Sessions Judge-cum-Chief Judicial Magistrate, Balasore in S.T. Case No. 103/163 of 2000 convicting the appellants under Section 395 and 376(g) IPC and sentencing them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/-, in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months, on each count; the sentences to run concurrently. Since all the appeals have been filed challenging the same order, they were heard together and are disposed of by this common judgment.2. The case of the prosecution is that in the night of 04.07.1999 the informant and his family members, i.e., his wife, two daughters and one son, were sleeping in different rooms of their house. At about 11 p.m. to 12 p.m., some unknown persons by abusing him in filthy language knocked at his door. Out of fear, he opened the door and three persons being armed with deadly weapons like B...
Saroj Podh and ors. Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Oct-20-2006
Reported in: 2007CriLJ1402
A.S. Naidu, J.1. The order passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Bargarh on 7th February, 1989 in S.T. Case No. 142/ 12 of 1985-87 convicting the appellants under Sections 323/336, I.P.C. and sentencing them to undergo S.I. for six months and one month respectively with a further direction that both the sentences would run concurrently is assailed in this Criminal Appeal.2-3. The prosecution case in brief is that on 20-6-1985 at noon a dispute crept up with regard to recital of a song by Sarojini Sahu-P.W. 12. It was alleged that co-accused of the appellants, namely, Panibudi Podh (since acquitted), took exception to the lyric and a quarrel ensued. Accused-Saroj Podh-appellant No. 1 who happens to be the son of Panibudi Podh intervened and allegedly caused hurt to Sarojini Sahu by pelting stones at her. On coming to know about the said fact Radhamohan Sahu, father of Sarojini Sahu, and her brother Sanat Kumar Sahu-P.W. 13 joined took exception at the behaviour of Panibudi Podh an...
Sri Ramaballav Das Vs. Sri Dhyan Chandra Das
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Oct-19-2006
Reported in: 103(2007)CLT199
A.K. Parichha, J.1. This second appeal is directed against the judgment dated 20.09.1991 passed by the Learned 2nd Addl. District Judge, Puri in Title Appeal No. 33/88 of 1990 confirming the judgment dated 31.8.1990 passed by Learned Subordinate Judge, Puri in Title Suit No. 120 of 1988.2. The Respondent as Plaintiff filed the above noted suit with the following pleadings:The Radhakanta Math situated at Balisahi, Puri town is a public religious institution belonging to Madhwa Gaudeswar Baishnab Cult. It has no deed of endowment or grant indicating line of succession to the office of the hereditary trustee of the Math, but as per convention the succession to the office of Mahanta is hereditary and devolves upon the chief disciple of the reigning Mahanta in the absence of any appointment made by him. The last Mahanta, namely, Mahanta Goura Govinda Das succeeded to the Gaddi of the Math by inheritance in the absence of any nomination to that effect by the then reigning Mahanta Biswambar D...
NabIn Seth Vs. Presiding Officer, Labour Court and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Oct-18-2006
Reported in: 103(2007)CLT213; [2007(112)FLR446]; 2006(II)OLR773
ORDERA.S. Naidu, J.1. Heard.2. Petitioner is Management of Bargarh Municipality. A labour dispute arose with regard to refusal of employment to one Jadumani Sahu, opposite party No. 2, w.e.f. 12.4.1997. The dispute was referred to the Presiding Officer, Labour Court by the State Government in exercise of the powers under Sections 10 and 12 of the I.D. Act which was registered as I.D. Case No. 4/2002.3. The Management filed written statement, but then thereafter chose not to appear. The award was passed on 30.4.2004. The writ petition has been filed two years after with a prayer to set aside the award and remit the matter back to the Labour Court for further hearing. It is submitted that due to certain inadvertent reasons, the petitioner could not appear in Court and take part in the hearing. But then, as to whether there was sufficient reason prohibiting the petitioner for taking part in the hearing is a pure question of fact, which cannot be adjudicated under the writ jurisdiction.4. ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »