Orissa Court May 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.
Managing Director, Woodburn Developers and Builders Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Smt. ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: May-03-2007
Reported in: 2007CriLJ3699
ORDERA.K. Parichha, J.1. This is a petition challenging the judgment passed by learned 1st Additional District and Sessions Judge, Cuttack in Criminal Appeal No. 49 of 2003 confirming the judgment of learned S.D.J.M. (Sadar), Cuttack in I.C.C. No. 304 of 2001 (Trial No. 7167 of 2001) wherein the petitioner was sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 3000/- in default to undergo S.I. for a period of three months and further to pay a sum of Rs. 15,000/- to the opposite party-complainant for the loss of the cheque amount and other ancillary expenses as a measure of compensation provided under Section 357(3) of the C.P.C.2. A cheque bearing No. 578559 for Rs. 12,880/- issued by the petitioner in favour of the opposite party was dishonoured by the bank on the ground that the petitioner instructed not to honour the cheque. After the cheque bounced, the opposite party sent a notice by registered post to the petitioner asking him to make payment within the statutory period of 15 days. When the petition...
Regional Manager, Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. MisIn Jena and Three ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: May-02-2007
Reported in: 2008ACJ1926; 2007(1)OLR739
ORDERN. Prusty, J.1. This appeal was filed in the year 2000 challenging the award dated 15.01.2000 passed by the learned Additional District Judge-cum-MACT, Sambalpur in Misc. (Accident) Case No. 151/8 of 1998-99 whereby the application for interim compensation filed by the claimants under Section 140 of the M.V. Act was disposed of directing the Insurer/appellant to pay an amount of Rs. 50,000/- to the claimants/ respondents as no fault liability/interim compensation. In this case vide order dated 26.04.2002 notice was issued to the respondents indicating therein that the appeal shall be disposed of at the stage of hearing on admission and the notice issued on all the respondents have been served.2. Heard Mr. S.D. Das, learned Senior Advocate for the appellant, Mr. D.P. Sahoo, learned Counsel for the respondent No. 4. None appeared on behalf of respondent Nos. 1 to 3 in spite of valid service of notice.3. It is contended on behalf of the appellant that the learned Tribunal has committ...
Bimal Lochan Das Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: May-02-2007
Reported in: 2007(II)OLR17
ORDERM.M. Das, J.1. Heard Mr. S. N. Mohapatra, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Mr. D. K. Mohapatra, learned Counsel for the Vigilance Department.2. This application has been filed by the petitioner for grant of anticipatory bail under Section 438, Cr.P.C.3. It appears from the record that two vigilance cases have been registered against the petitioner, one being for illegal sanction of loans as President of Baripada Urban Co-operative Bank Ltd. and the other for giving direct appointments to certain employees in the said Bank. The said cases have been numbered as Balasore Vigilance P.S. Case No. 35 of 2005 and 36 of 2005 corresponding to Vigilance Cases of even number in the Court of the learned Vigilance Judge-cum-Chief Judicial Magistrate, Balasore. The petitioner was before this Court in BLAPL No. 7299 of 2005 in respect Vigilance P.S. Case No. 35 of 2005. This Court by an elaborate order dated 19.9.2005 discussing the materials available and other submissions made by the res...
The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Smt. Banita Meher and Two ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: May-02-2007
Reported in: 2007(II)OLR35
ORDERN. Prusty, J.1. This appeal has been filed by the opposite party No. 2/Insurance Company challenging the award-dated 07.01.2003 passed by the learned District Judge-cum-MACT. (I), Bolangir in MJC No. 35 of 1998, which was filed under Section 166 of the M.V. Act.2. The case of the claimant/respondent Nos. 1 and 2, who are father and mother of deceased Mahadev Meher, in the Court below is that the deceased was traveling in the offending vehicle as owner of the goods. The deceased was carrying on business of vegetables. On the date of accident he was taking brinjals to Berhampur in the offending Mini Truck bearing Registration No. OR-03-7617 on payment of Rs. 5000/- to the owner of the vehicle towards hire charges. Due to rash and negligence of the driver, the vehicle met with an accident and the deceased Mahadev Meher succumbed to the injuries at the spot. The deceased was unmarried and was earning about Rs. 4,000/- to Rs. 5,000/- per month. The vehicle was validly insured with the ...
Management of Regional Plant Resources Centre Vs. Workmen of Regional ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: May-02-2007
Reported in: 104(2007)CLT369; [2007(115)FLR49]; 2007(II)OLR127
A.K. Ganguly, C.J. 1. This writ appeal has been filed against the order of the learned Single Judge dated 13.9.2006 passed in W.P.(C) No. 7800 of 2004. By the said order, the learned Single Judge dismissed the writ application on two grounds; the first one was that the writ application was filed on 23.7.2004 challenging the Award dated 30.11.2002 passed by the Industrial Tribunal, Orissa, Bhubaneswar i.e. after a substantial delay and there was no averment in the writ application explaining the delay. The learned Single Judge held that though the provisions of the Limitation Act do not apply to a writ petition, but it is well settled that the remedy of the writ Court is only available to a litigant who approaches the Court with sufficient promptitude. Stale claims are not to be entertained by a writ Court. It is difficult for this Court to take a view different from the one taken by the learned Single Judge in the facts and circumstances of the case.The other ground taken by the writ C...
State of Orissa Vs. Himadri Sahu and Two ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: May-01-2007
Reported in: 104(2007)CLT289; 2007(II)OLR239
ORDERA.K. Parichha, J.1. These are appeals filed by the State against the awards passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Deogarh in L.A. Case Nos.98/98, 25/98, 79/98, 123/98, 11/99, 21/99, 129/98, 7/99,23/99, 96/98, 60/99, 73/98,26/99, 36/99, 36/96, and 82/98 answering the references under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act (in short, 'the Act') made by the concerned Land Acquisition Zone Officer for determination of the proper market value of the acquired lands.2. The lands belonging to the claimants-respondents of the above noted appeals were acquired by the State of Orissa for the purpose of Rengali Dam Project vide notification under Section 4(1) of the Act. The Land Acquisition Zone Officer, Deogarh after conducting enquiry under Section 11 of the Act awarded respective compensation to the claimants-respondents for the acquired lands and trees. Not being satisfied with the quantum of compensation, the claimants-respondents filed separate protest petitions demandin...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›