Orissa Court July 2006 Judgments
Bipra Pradhan and ors. Vs. Smt. Nini Kumari Alias Sanjukta Suar
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-28-2006
Reported in: 2006(II)OLR305
L. Mohapatra, J.1. The defendants have filed this writ application challenging the order dated 19.2.2005 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Aska in I.A. No. 5 of 2005 restraining them to go over the suit schedule property to thrash or collect the paddy till disposal of the suit as well as the order of the learned Additional District Judge, Fast Track, Aska dismissing the appeal filed by the defendants.2. The case of the plaintiff-opposite party is that his father and uncle had got the suit property in the year 1937 by virtue of a Patta issued by the Jamidar of Sanakhemundi. After death of father of the plaintiff-opposite party in the year 1945, plaintiff and his uncle namely, Rama Prasad Sumanta continued in cultivating possession of the suit property. In the last settlement the suit property was recorded jointly in the name of the plaintiff and his uncle in the year 1948. In the year 1985, the said Ram Prasada Sumanta expired and the plaintiff continued in possession...
Tag this Judgment!State of Orissa Vs. Munadhar Agrawala
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-27-2006
Reported in: 2006CriLJ4739; 2006(II)OLR342
Pradip Mohanty, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 24.05.1989 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Titilagarh in 2(c) C.C. No. 37 of 1937/T.R. No. 95 of 1988 acquitting the respondent of the offence under Section 16(1)(a)(ii) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act (for short, 'the Act').2. The case of the prosecution is that the accused-respondent was running a retail grocery shop in the name and style of M/s Rajendra Stores at Hatpada, Saintala, in the district of Bolangir, where he used to store edible oils, cereals, pulses, sugar, spices, dust tea, etc., for sale. On 28.07.1987 at about 11.00 A.M., the Food Inspector of Titilagarh inspected the said shop in presence of the accused-respondent and witnesses. On demand, the accused-respondent could not produce the food licence, as required under the Act. While verifying the different food articles stored for sale for human consumption, the Food Inspector suspected the Mahua oil and m...
Tag this Judgment!Susant Kumar Roy Vs. Mira Roy and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-27-2006
Reported in: AIR2007Ori26; 2006(II)OLR354
A.K. Ganguly, J.1. The appellant herein was the sole opposite party in a writ petition filed by Mira Roy, Mita Roy and Rita Roy (the respondents herein). No statutory authority was impleaded as opposite party in the writ petition. The entire dispute is over rights of property between private parties. The order dated 21.11.2003 passed by the District Judge, Cuttack in Misc. Appeal No.91 of 2003 is the subject matter of challenge.2. The material facts are:The writ petitioners filed Civil Suit No.142 of 2003 in the Court of Civil Judge (Jr. Divn.), 1st Court, Cuttack, against the appellant praying for the following reliefs:3.a. For an order of permanent injunction restraining the defendant/opp.party to change the nature and character of the suit property and not to make any construction over the vacant space.3.b. Restraining the defendant/opp.party from clearing the main entrance adjoining to the main road.3.c. For a direction to make all facilities available to the plaintiffs/petitioners...
Tag this Judgment!Executive Officer, Berhampur Municipality Vs. Konchada Visweswar Rao S ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-26-2006
Reported in: 102(2006)CLT528
Pradip Mohanty, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 21.1.1987 passed by the Learned 2nd Addl. Sessions Judge, Berhampur in Criminal Appeal No. 21/1986 (1/86 GDC) setting aside the judgment of conviction and sentence dated 9.12.1985 passed by the J.M.S.C., Berhampur in 3(a) C.C. 140 of 1982 (T.R. No. 14 of 1985) and acquitting the respondent of the offence under Section 385-A of the Orissa Municipal Act.2. The case of the prosecution is that the respondent had obtained permission for construction of a building for the purpose of running a hotel, whereas he had constructed a building not in accordance with the approved plan but in a different manner violating the plan approved. Further, instead of the purpose for which sanction was granted for the construction of a building, namely, for starting of a hotel, the respondent had started a private market in the newly constructed building giving shop rooms to various dealers for selling food grains, ghee, etc. Th...
Tag this Judgment!Patitapaban Panda and Arun Kumar Pattnaik Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-25-2006
Reported in: 2006(II)OLR335
A.S. Naidu, J.1. All the three aforesaid CRMC petitions have been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C with a prayer to quash the proceedings of T.R. Case Nos. 4 of 1984 and 35 of 1983 pending before the Special Judge, Bhubaneswar mainly on the ground that though the petitioners were charged with alleged commission of offences under Section 5(2) read with Section 5(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 as long back as in the year 1982, the proceedings of the cases have not yet come to a logical end till date though 22/23 years have passed in the meanwhile. The further ground urged by the petitioners is that the aforesaid offences cannot be brought home against them they not being public servants in relation to the alleged crime.2. Admittedly the petitioners were the employees of the Utkal University. The allegations against them broadly were that while they were in charge of publication of results of the Degree Examination with regard to withheld cases and had been entrusted with t...
Tag this Judgment!Nanda Kishore Maharana Vs. State of Orissa and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-24-2006
Reported in: 102(2006)CLT289
L. Mohapatra, J.1. The Petitioner who is the informant has filed this writ application praying for a direction to the opposite parties to hand over investigation to the C.B.I, to investigate into the offence alleged.2. The case of the petitioner as narrated in the FIR is that on 11.3. 2005 at about 8.30 A.M. he received information that the dead body of his brother Rama Kishore Maharana was seen hanging from the iron ladder within the premises of Sub-Collector's office. After receiving the information, he reached the spot and found that the police had already brought down the dead body and it was lying on the floor. He also alleges that he had seen injuries on hand, neck as well as thigh of the deceased. Suspecting the same to be a murder, upon inquiry he learnt that on 9.3.2005 the deceased had gone to the office of the Sub-Collector and on the said date some lawyers were shouting at some of the Sikshya Sahayakas including the deceased and were threatening to kill him. The allegation ...
Tag this Judgment!Divisional Manager, Oriental Insurance Company Limited Vs. Smt. Kabuta ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-24-2006
Reported in: II(2007)ACC88; 2007ACJ2796; 102(2006)CLT489; [2006(111)FLR680]
L. Mohapatra, J. 1. This appeal is directed against the Judgment dated 20th May, 2004 passed by the Learned Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation and Assistant Labour Commissioner, Balasore in W.C. Case No. 10 of 2001 directing payment of compensation of Rs. 2,29,635/- with a further direction that in the event of failure on the part of the appellant to deposit the award within thirty days, the same will carry simple interest at the rate of 12% per annum.2. The claimants are the legal heirs of the deceased Satyadev Pandit. Their case before the Commissioner is that the Satyadev Pandit was working as a driver in the truck belonging to respondent No. 8. On 22.1.2001 the deceased drove the truck from Ichhapur to M/s. Birla tyres in the district of Balasore fully loaded with rubber. After reaching the gate of Birla Tyres while the deceased was stepping down from the truck, he lost control over himself and fell down. He was immediately shifted to Balasore Headquarters Hospital where he wa...
Tag this Judgment!The Executive Engineer, Padagada Dam Division and anr. Vs. Sri Ghana S ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-24-2006
Reported in: I(2007)ACC589; 102(2006)CLT437; [2006(111)FLR401]
L. Mohapatra, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment of the Learned Commissioner, Workmen's Compensation, Jeypore directing payment of compensation of Rs. 2,39,458/- to the claimant-respondent in W. C. Case No. 11 of 2000.2. Case of the claimant-respondent is that he was working as Pump Operator in Sub-Division No. 1, Padagada Dam Division. In course of employment, on 9.12,1999 he met with an accident and sustained injuries. For the injuries sustained in course of employement, an application was field before the Learned Commissioner, Workmen's Compensation, Jeypore for payment of compensation. The appellants field a written statement denying the allegations made in the claim petition and a specific stand was taken to the effect that accident did not take place in course of and out of employment and therefore the claimant is not entitled to any compensation. On the basis of the pleadings of the parties, Learned Commissioner framed four issues and on analysis of evidence, held...
Tag this Judgment!Abanikanta Sahoo and ors. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-24-2006
Reported in: 2006(II)OLR585
M.M. Das, J.1. Though notices of the writ petition issued to the opp. parties have been duly served, except opp. party No. 1 -Union of India, none of the other opp. parties has entered appearance in this case. Mr. Ramesh Agarwal, learned Counsel appearing for the Union of India is also absent when the matter is taken up. We, therefore, proceed to hear this case on merit.2. The petitioner in the present writ petition has challenged the order under Annexure-6 passed by the opposite party No. 3 banning all Tippers/trucks controlled/owned by the petitioners/relatives and associates from transporting coal in all the Collieries/areas of M.C.L. till the disposal of the Criminal Cases said to be pending against the petitioners and subject to the out-come of the said cases.3. It appears from the record that a similar order was passed by the opposite party No. 2 on 2.3.2004 (Annexure-1) which was challenged by the petitioners in W.P.(C) No. 5212 of 2004. The said writ petition was heard and disp...
Tag this Judgment!Abanlkanta Sahoo and ors. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jul-24-2006
Reported in: 102(2006)CLT821
M.M. Das, J.1. Though notices of the Writ Petition issued to the Opp. parties lave been duly served, except Opp. party No. 1 Union of India, lone of the other Opp. parties has entered appearance in this Case. Mr. Ramesh Agarwal, Learned Counsel appearing for the Union of India is also absent when the matter is taken up. We, therefore, proceed to hear this Case on merit.2. The Petitioner in the present Writ Petition has challenged the order under Annexure-6 passed by the Opposite party No. 3 banning all Tippers/trucks controlled/owned by the Petitioners/relatives and associates from transporting coal in all the Collieries/areas of M.C.L. till the disposal of the Criminal Cases said to be pending against the Petitioners and subject to the out-come of the said Cases.3. It appears from the record that a similar order was passed by the Opposite party No. 2 on 2.3.2004 (Annexure-1) which was challenged by the Petitioners in W.P.(G) No. 5212 of 2004. The said Writ Petition was heard and dispo...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »