Orissa Court June 2006 Judgments
State Vs. Banambar Samal
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jun-29-2006
Reported in: 2006(II)OLR241
P.K. Tripathy, J.1. This appeal has been filed challenging the order of acquittal recorded by the trial Court in Sessions Trial Case No. 2/143 of 1985 of the Court of the learned Assistant Sessions Judge-curt7-Addl.Chief Judicial Magistrate, Puri.2. Prosecution case is that while sleeping in her bed room at about 1.30 A.M. in the night of 25.2.1985, Nirupama Samal (P.W.No. 1) was attacked by somebody and then she woke up and discovered that accused-respondent was cutting her throat by the knife (M.O.-I). She identified the accused and resisted him by holding the iron portion (blade portion) of the knife and in the struggle, the handle was separated from the iron portion of the knife. Then accused holding the handle of the knife ran away. P.W. No. 2 tried to catch hold the accused and in that process accused managed to escape but his lungi remained in the hands of P.W. No. 2. Then she reported the incident to her uncle-in-law, who was sleeping in another bedroom. She was brought to hosp...
Tag this Judgment!Hadu Sundara Vs. Uma Sundara
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jun-29-2006
Reported in: 2006(II)OLR396
ORDERA.K. Parichha, J.1. Heard2. The petitioner, who is the defendant No. 1 in Title Suit No. 226 of 2006 of the Court of learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Bhubaneswar, has filed this revision challenging the legality of the order dated 26.8.2004 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Bhubaneswar in the above noted suit allowing substitution of the opposite party in place of the deceased-plaintiff, Uma Sundara.3. The deceased-plaintiff, Uma Sundara filed the above noted suit against the petitioner praying for partition of the suit property and recovery of possession of 50% share of the suit schedule property and for cancellation of some sale deeds executed by the petitioner in favour of defendant Nos. 2 to 11. She also prayed for permanent injunction against the defendants from interfering with her share in the suit schedule properties. Petitioner-defendant No. 1 filed written statement and contested the suit. When the matter stood thus, the plaintiff died and the pr...
Tag this Judgment!Balasore Bus Association and Etc. Vs. State of Orissa and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jun-29-2006
Reported in: AIR2006Ori163
R.N. Biswal, J.1. The petitioners who are Bus and Truck Owners' Associations and some private bus and truck operators belonging to different parts of Orissa, have filed the aforesaid writ petitions raising substantially similar points of law and as such, they were heard analogously and a common judgment is passed thereon.2. The issue raised for consideration of this Court in all these cases is validity of the notification dated 26-11-1998 of the Government of Orissa, Commerce and Transport Department bearing No. LC-1-16/ 98-16000/T bringing amendment to Orissa Motor Vehicles Rules, 1993 which was called as 'Orissa Motor Vehicles (Third Amendment) Rules, 1998. The facts in O.J.C. No. 17368 of 1998 is taken as typical of the cases which has been filed by the Ganjam Bus Owners' Association through its Secretary. As per this case, opposite party No. 1 published a notification in Orissa Gazette on 25.8.1998 in which it proposed to amend the entire fees structure relating to fees for applica...
Tag this Judgment!Hyder Consulting Ltd. Vs. the Governor for the State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jun-28-2006
Reported in: 2007(1)ARBLR244(Orissa); 102(2006)CLT227
B.P. Das, J. 1. This Misc. Appeal arises out of the judgement dated 9.1.2002 passed by the District Judge, Khurda at Bhubaneswar, allowing the application filed by the present respondent under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (in short, 'the Act') in M.J.C. No. 232/2000 and setting aside the award dated 26. 4.2000 passed by an Arbitral Tribunal.2. The brief facts necessary for disposal of the present appeal may be stated thus:The appellant-Hyder Consulting Ltd. having its Registered Office in London (U.K.) entered into a contract on 10.1.1 995 with the respondent-the Governor of Orissa represented by the Chief Engineer (N.H.), Orissa P.W.D., whereunder the appellant was engaged as Technical Consultant by the present respondent for rendering consultancy service to the road project, namely, Four Laning of Bhubaneswar-Cuttack Section including the Mahanadi Bridge. Since dispute arose between the parties, in terms of Clause 8 of the Contract, which contained arbitra...
Tag this Judgment!Jagannath @ Jagamohan Dharua and ors. Vs. Prithwiraj Singh Dharua and ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jun-28-2006
Reported in: 102(2006)CLT326
A.K. Parichha, J.1. This appeal has been filed against the judgment and decree passed by the Learned Subordinate Judge, Bolangir in T.A. No. 5/5 of 1984 reversing the judgment and decree of the Learned Munsif, Bolangir in T.S. No. 28 of 1976.2. Respondent No. 1-Prithwiraj Singh Dharua as plaintiff filed Title Suit No. 28 of 1976 in the Court of Learned Munsif, Bolangir praying for declaration of his title over the suit land pleading inter alia that his predecessor Harihar Singh Dharua, the Gauntia of the Village Barla was in possession of the Bhogra land including the suit land and as successor of Gauntia he was in possession of the Suit Land. On abolition of Gauntia system in 1951, the State Government settled the suit land in his favour along with his brothers (defendant Nos. 5 and 6), as they were the sons of Ex-Gauntia and were found to be in possession of the suit land. It was claimed in the plaint that defendants 1 to 4 (the present appellants), who are strangers to the family of...
Tag this Judgment!Bichitrananda Mohanty Vs. Collector
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jun-28-2006
Reported in: 103(2007)CLT84; 2006(II)OLR248
ORDERL. Mohapatra, J.1. This writ application is directed against the order dated 11.5,2006 passed by the Collector, Keonjhar in a proceeding under Section 6-A of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955.2. Facts leading to initiation of the aforesaid case is that on 24.2.2006 while a joint checking was being conducted on National High Way No. 6 near Dangarapada, sample of fuel was drawn from the bus bearing registration No.OR-09-1827 and it was found that the oil tank of the bus contained 20 litres of kerosene. The bus as well as kerosene were seized and the vehicle was handed over to the Town Police Station for further investigation and initiation of proceeding under Section 6-A as well as under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act. The proceeding was initiated for contravention of Clause 8 of Orissa Kerosene Control Order, 1962 read with Clause 3 of Kerosene Control Order (Restriction on Use and Fixation of Ceiling Price), 1993. In the said proceeding the petitioner who i the owner...
Tag this Judgment!State of Orissa Vs. Dhanapati Paraja
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jun-23-2006
Reported in: 2006(II)OLR304
Sujit Barman Roy, C.J.1. This appeal is preferred by the State of Orissa against the judgment dated 28.2.1 987 passed by the learned Sub-Judge-cum-Asst. Sessions Judge, Jeypore acquitting the respondent from the charge under Section 395, I.P.C. in Sessions Case No. 25 of 1986.2. Some women were going to a Jatra at about 8 P.M. from their village together, when the respondent and some other accused numbering about 7/8 persons being armed with lathi etc. arrived at. the scene of occurrence and snatched away from the women members some nose pins, bangles and gold chain. On the aforesaid allegations respondent Dhanapati Paraja and some others were prosecuted for commission of offence under Section 395, IPC. Some of the accused, who were tried along with Dhanapati were acquitted by the trial Court on 20.2.1987 under Section 232, Cr.P.C. By the impugned judgment respondent Dhanapati Paraja was also acquitted by the trial Court. The said judgment of acquittal of respondent Dhanapati Paraja is...
Tag this Judgment!Maman Ram Agrawalla Vs. State of Orissa and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jun-21-2006
Reported in: 2006(II)OLR211
L. Mohapatra, J.1. This is the 5th journey of petitioner to this Court. In this writ application, the petitioner prays for a direction to the opposite parties 2 to 4 to appoint him as Storage Agent for Harbhanga Block for the year 2005-2006 and execute the agreement within a specified period.2. The case of the petitioner is that he had applied for appointment as Storage Agent for Harbhanga Block in the year 1992 and after necessary inquiry, the Collector, Boudh (O.P. No. 4) found the petitioner eligible for such appointment and recommended his case to the Orissa State Civil Supplies Corporation Ltd. for such appointment. The petitioner was therefore appointed as storage agent for Harbhanga Block for the year 1992-1993 and, thereafter, continued as such till the dispute arose in the year 2003-2004. For the year 2003-2004, the opposite party No. 4-Collector after conducting inquiry had recommended the name of the petitioner for continuance as storage agent for the aforesaid Harbhanga Blo...
Tag this Judgment!Nityananda Panigrahi Vs. General Manager (Mines) Tata Iron and Steel C ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jun-21-2006
Reported in: 102(2006)CLT339; [2006(111)FLR174]
A.S. Naidu, J.1. The award dated 21.9.2000 (Annexure-5) passed by the Presiding officer, Industrial Tribunal, Rourkela in I.D. Case No. 37/97(C) is assailed in this case. According to the petitioner he Was an employee under opposite party No. 1 and his services were illegally terminated with effect from 20.5.1992. He raised an industrial dispute and conciliation having failed, Government of India in the Ministry of Labour in exercise of power conferred under Clause (d) of Sub-section (1) and Sub-section (2A) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act referred the following dispute to the Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal, Rourkela for adjudication :whether the action of the management of M/s. Tata Iron and Steel Co, Ltd., Dist. : Keonjhar in dismissing Sri Nityananda Panigrahi, P. No. 92154 vide letter dt. 20.5.92 was justified If not, to what relief the workman is entitled ?2. According to the petitioner-workman in course of his service a domestic enquiry was conducted against ...
Tag this Judgment!State of Orissa Vs. Sukuram Munda
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jun-21-2006
Reported in: 2006(II)OLR380
A.K. Parichha, J.1. Since both matters arise out of a common judgment passed by learned Ad hoc Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court), Champua in S.T. Case No. 15/75 of 2005/2000, they were heard analogously and are disposed of by this common judgment.FACT:2. Appellant is the son of Sonu Munda, the deceased through his first wife and was residing separately from his father, Sonu Munda sold a piece of land, but out of the sale proceeds he did not give anything to the appellant, for which the latter was bearing a grudge against Sonu Munda, While the matter stood thus, on 24.5.1999 at about 9.30 P.M. the Grama Rakhi of the area (P.W. 6) saw the appellant going on the village road armed with bow, arrows and axe. He also noticed that hands of the deceased were stained with blood. Suspecting some foul-play, he rushed to the house of Sonu Munda and found the door of the house lying broken and Sonu Munda, his wife, Junga Munda, son, Kande Munda and daughter, Sambari lying on the floor of...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »