Orissa Court November 2007 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.
Divisional Manager, the New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. State of Oris ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Nov-22-2007
Reported in: 2009ACJ435; 2008(I)OLR11
ORDERN. Prusty, J.1. When this matter is taken up, nobody appeared on behalf of the petitioner to move this writ petition nor any mention has been made on behalf of the learned Counsel for the petitioner for adjournment of the case.I have gone through the contents of the writ petition.2. As it appears certified copy of the impugned award has not been filed along with writ petition at the time of its presentation. Only the free copy of the award, which is supplied to the Insurance Company for compliance, has been filed. The free copy of the award is supplied to the parties for the purpose of information and compliance of the order, but not for the purpose of using the same in filing of the appeal or writ petition, challenging the same award.3. This writ petition has been filed on 07.03.2006 by the opposite party No. 2/Insurance Company challenging the judgment/award dated 02.03.2004 passed by the learned 3rd Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bhubaneswar, in Misc. Case No. 579 of 1993. In ...
Divisional Manager, the New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. State of Oris ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Nov-22-2007
Reported in: 106(2008)CLT139
ORDERN. Prusty, J.1. When this matter is taken up, nobody appeared on behalf of the Petitioner to move this Writ Petition nor any mention has been made on behalf of the Learned Counsel for the Petitioner for adjournment of the case.2. I have gone through the contents of the Writ Petition.3. As it appears certified copy of the impugned award has not been filed along with Writ Petition at the time of its presentation. Only the free copy of the award, which is supplied to the Insurance Company for compliance, has been filed. The free copy of the award is supplied to the parties for the purpose of information and compliance of the order, but not for the purpose of using the same in filing of the appeal or Writ Petition, challenging the same award.4. This Writ Petition has been filed on 07.03.2006 by the Opposite Party No. 2/lnsurance Company challenging the Judgment/award dated 02.03.2004 passed by the Learned 3rd Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bhubaneswar, in Misc. Case No. 579 of 1993. ...
Sri Braja Bhai Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Nov-21-2007
Reported in: 2008(I)OLR56
ORDERM.M. Das, J. 1. This is an application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for grant of bail to the petitioner.2. On 20.11.2006, one Shri Dandanirodha Mishra, the then General Manager of 'The Samaja' lodged an F.I.R. in the Cantonment Police Station alleging, inter alia, that a sum of Rs. 97,08,500/- has been mis-appropriated from the account of 'The Samaja' in two phases. It was alleged that the petitioner, who was the then General Manager, Printer and Publisher of 'The Samaja' by resorting to fraud, forgery, cheating etc., at the first phase, misappropriated a sum of Rs. 50.00 lakhs and in the second phase, the petitioner and Shri Sunil Poddar, Managing Director of M/s. Poddar Global Ltd. misappropriated a sum of Rs. 47,08,500/- fraudulently. On lodging of the F.I.R., investigation was taken up. Two cheques amounting to Rs. 15.00 lakhs each and another cheque amounting to Rs. 20.00 lakhs, being bearer cheques, under the joint signature of the petitioner and Smt. Manorama Mohapatra, who is...
K.C. Pradhan Vs. Arun Kumar Dutta
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Nov-20-2007
Reported in: AIR2008Ori109
Sanju Panda, J.1. The plaintiff is the appellant. He has challenged the order and decree dated 11-8-1983 and 28-8-1983 passed by the learned Subordinate Judge, Jeypore in Money Suit No. 116 of 1982 wherein the learned trial Court has partly decreed the suit in favour of the plaintiff without granting any interest on the principal amount. Hence, the present appeal is confined to the payment of interest part only.2. Though notice of this appeal was issued to and personally served on the respondent, there is no appearance on behalf of the respondent.3. Before dealing with the question raised, the facts involved in the present case leading to filing of the appeal are narrated.The appellant-plaintiff out of friendly re-, lationshtp had given Rs. 12,000/- to the defendant on 25-4-1979 and on demand the defendant, vide two letters, Ext. 1 dated 4-6-1980 and Ext. 2 dated 28-3-1980, agreed to pay the said amount. The defendant has also issued two cheques dated 8-10-1980 and 10-1-1982 to the pla...
Shri Bibekananda Mishra and ors. Vs. State of Orissa and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Nov-20-2007
Reported in: 105(2008)CLT106
ORDERN. Prusty, J.1. This application has been filed by the intervener Petitioner i.e. newly added Opposite Party Nos. 5 to 9 for vacation of the interim Order Dated 30.10.2007 whereby this Court has directed 'status quo with regard to selection of Swechhasevi Sikhya sahayak in the district concerned shall be maintained till the next date.'2. Heard Mr. J.K. Rath, Learned senior Advocate for the Petitioner, Mr. H.P. Rath, Learned Standing Counsel for School and Mass Education Department/Opposite Party Nos. 1 to 4 and Mr. Samir Kumar Das, Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of Opposite Parties 5 to 9.3. Opposing the above application, Mr. Rath, Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that the vide order/Judgment dated 23.7.2007, this Court while disposing of W.P.(C) No. 14981 of 2006, W.P.(C) No. 14.133 of 2006 and W.P.(C) No. 1855 of 2007 at paragraph 17 observed as follows:From discussion above, this Court is of the opinion that Clause 4.1 of the advertisement dated 14.10.2006 under...
Srikanta Sundar Patra and Three ors. Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Nov-20-2007
Reported in: 2008(I)OLR311
ORDERM.M. Das, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioners and the learned Counsel for the State.This is an application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.Allegation of commission of offence under Sections 498A/34 I.P.C. read with Section 4 of the D.P. Act has been made against the petitioners and other co-accused persons. The petitioners are in laws of the informant.2. This Court in BLAPL No. 7953 of 2007 by order 310 dated 19.11.2007 has granted anticipatory bail to the husband of the informant-wife.Considering the nature of allegations made against the petitioners, though I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to them, I direct that on their surrendering before the learned J.M.F.C., Soro in Crl. Trl. (G.R. Case) No. 284 of 2007 arising out of Soro P.S. Case No. 144 of 2007 by 7.12.2007 and moving for bail, they shall be released on bail on such terms and conditions as the learned J.M.F.C. may deem just and proper.3. The BLAPL is acco...
Subeda Nayak (Since Dead, Represented by His L.Rs.) Vs. Government of ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Nov-19-2007
Reported in: 105(2008)CLT109
ORDER1. Heard Sri Ganeswar Rath, Learned Counsel for the Petitioner, Learned Additional Government advocate for Opp. Parties. 1,2 and 3 and Sri S.B. Jena, Learned Counsel for the Opp.Parties 4 to 6.2. A sale deed transferring area measuring Ac.0.17 decimals in Hal Khata No. 86, Plot No. 951, Mouza-Sikrida, P.S. Nuagan, District Nayagarh was executed by Opp.Party No. 4 on 29.1.2006 which was registered by the District Sub-Registrar at SI. No.370 of 96 on the same date. In the said sale deed it was mentioned by Opp.Party No. 4 that he had already received the full consideration amount and had already delivered the possession of the land to the original Petitioner, who died during the pendency of the Writ Petition and his legal heirs were substituted in his place. But later on vide a separate deed, the Opp.Party No. 4 cancelled the sale deed through a document registered at SI. No. 398. of 96 dated 1.2.96 and the District Sub-Registrar recorded on his office copy of the sale deed as under...
Raghunath Sahoo Vs. Collector and District Magistrate and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Nov-19-2007
Reported in: 2008(I)OLR230
A.S. Naidu, J.1. The petitioner is the elected Sarpanch of Salabana Grama Panchayat in the district of Keonjhar. His election has been assailed before the Civil Judge (JD), Anandapur in Election CMA No. 8 of 2007 which is subjudice. He is aggrieved by the fact that during pendency of the said election dispute, the Collector, Keonjhar has initiated a proceeding under Section 26 of the Orissa Grama Panchayat Act and has issued a notice to him vide Annexure-4 to show cause as to why he should not be declared disqualified to hold the post of Sarpanch. According to him such action amounts to double jeopardy and he is being subjected to unnecessary harassment. Therefore he has prayed to quash the said notice Annexure-4.2. Opposite parties 4 to 9 have entered appearance and have filed a counter-affidavit and so also opposite party No. 3. According to them there is no bar for initiating a proceeding under Section 26 of the G.P. Act during pendency of the election dispute initiated under Sectio...
Sushanta Patra Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Nov-19-2007
Reported in: II(2008)DMC110; 2008(I)OLR310
ORDERM.M. Das, J.Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner, learned Counsel for the informant and the learned Counsel for the State.This is an application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.1. Allegation of commission of offence under Sections 498A/34 I.P.C. read with Section 4 of the D.P. Act has been made against the petitioner who is the husband of the informant. Such allegation has been made only after a couple of month from the date of marriage. It appears that the petitioner has filed C.S. No. 722 of 2007 before the Court below under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act for restitution of conjugal rights.Learned Counsel for the informant-wife vehemently argues that the petitioner had relationship with another lady and when the informant objected to the same, the petitioner threatened the informant to drive her out of his house.Since the civil suit for restitution of conjugal rights is pending, I express no opinion in this regard.2. Considerin...
Manoj Kumar Panda Vs. Orissa Air Products Ltd.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Nov-16-2007
Reported in: 105(2008)CLT142; [2008(116)FLR1005]; (2008)IILLJ800Ori; 2008(I)OLR287
A.K. Ganguly, C.J.1. This writ appeal has been filed by the workman, the Opposite Party No. 2 in the Writ Petition which was filed by M/s. Orissa Air Products Ltd., the Company.2. The Writ Petition, being OJC No. 8193 of 2001, was filed by the Company challenging the Order Dated 25.4.2001 passed by the Labour Court, Bhubaneswar in Industrial Dispute Misc. Case No. 5 of 1994. The said Misc. Case was registered on the basis of an application filed by the present Appellant under Section 33C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 ( hereinafter called the 'said Act'). In the said Misc. Case, a prayer was made by the present Appellant for issuing a direction on the Management of the Company for computation of full wages during the period of suspension of the Appellant from service.3. The material facts are:The present Appellant was working as an Assistant Depot Superintendent in the Respondent's establishment at Rourkela. In view of certain allegation against him, he was placed under suspen...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »