Orissa Court June 2007 Judgments
Niranjan Nayak Vs. State of Orissa and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jun-29-2007
Reported in: 104(2007)CLT517; 2007(II)OLR197
Sanju Panda, J.1. The order dated 21.04.2006 passed by the Orissa State Administrative Tribunal, Bhubaneswar in OA No. 529 of 2006 is challenged in the present writ petition.2. The brief facts of the case are as under:The petitioner was appointed as Grama Rakshi by order dated 12.7.1997 and while continuing as such he was discharged from service by opposite party No. 4, Superintendent of Police, Nayagarh on 30th May, 2001 for his involvement and arrest in a criminal case and the said order of discharge was issued during the pendency of a criminal case. The petitioner was acquitted from the charges under Sections 366/109 IPC by the Asst. Sessions Judge-cum-Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nayagarh in Sessions Trial No. 72/280 of 2002 by order dated 02.12.2005. Thereafter he has filed Original Application before the Orissa State Administrative Tribunal to quash the discharge order passed by opposite party No. 4. The Tribunal held that the petitioner was holding a civil post and was allegedly i...
Tag this Judgment!Pravat Ranjan Mohanty and anr. Vs. State of Orissa and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jun-29-2007
Reported in: 2007(II)OLR352
Pradip Mohanty, J.1. The petitioners were the applicants for the direct recruitment test held in the year 1992-93 for the post of S.I. of Police. Since they were not selected, they approached the Orissa Administrative Tribunal, Cuttack Bench in O.A. No. 2798 (C) of 1994 challenging the entire recruitment process. The above O.A. came to be disposed of by the Tribunal by judgment dated 8.11.1996 alongwith three other O.As. By that judgment, the Tribunal directed to reduce the marks fixed for viva vocetest notionally and to proportionately arrive at marks secured by the candidates in the viva vocetest accordingly. Since there was non-compliance of the order, the petitioners filed I.P. No. 133 (C) of 1997, but the same was dismissed by order dated 21.11.1997. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioners preferred a writ application before this Court, which was registered as OJC No. 173 of 1998. On 3.2.2005, the above OJC was disposed of with the direction to implement the judgment of the T...
Tag this Judgment!iswar Juanga Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jun-29-2007
Reported in: 2008CriLJ2752
1. Heard.2. Order of conviction under Section 302, IPC and sentence of imprisonment for life imposed by learned Sessions Judge, Keonjhar on accused-appellant in Sessions Trial Cue No, 44 of 1994 is under challenge,3. Prosecution case in inert is that en 21-11- 1993 in the afternoon accused picked up quarrel with his wife Lila (hereinafter referred to as deceased) and in that process dealt a slab blow to her belly by use of the knife (M.O.I.) and as result of that the deceased died. Neighbourers of the accused came to the spot and found that deceased was lying dead and accused was sitting holding the blood stained knife in his hand and to the query of some of the co-villagers (that includes P.W. 1) accused made extra judicial confession relating to the crime. When the villagers wanted to go near him, accused retaliated and because of that with the help of P.W. 4, a co-villager and other witnesses (P.Ws. 1, 2 and 3) overpower the accused and tied him before proceeding to Police Station t...
Tag this Judgment!Sri Brajabandhu Mohapatra Vs. Sri Sasanka Sekhar Senapati
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jun-27-2007
Reported in: I(2008)BC258; 105(2008)CLT193; 2007(II)OLR287
M.M. Das, J.1. This case arises out of a private complaint. The opp. party herein filed I.C.C. No. 972 of 2006 before the learned S.D.J.M., Bhubaneswar alleging commission of offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act (for short, 'the N.I. Act') to have been committed by the petitioner. After taking cognizance of the offence, summon was issued to the petitioner to appear in the said case. On the date fixed for the appearance, an application under Section 205 ,f of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as 'the' Code') for dispensing with the personal appearance of the petitioner and for allowing him to be represented through his advocate, was filed on behalf of the petitioner by the counsel appearing on his behalf. The grounds taken in the said application were that, the petitioner is a busy businessman and mostly remains out of Bhubaneswar for which, it is not practicable on his part to appear in person in Court and that the offence alleged being under...
Tag this Judgment!Ramu Minz Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jun-26-2007
Reported in: 2007CriLJ4449
1. The judgment dated 29-10-1997 passed by the Sessions Judge, Sundargarh in S.T. No. 185 of 1995 convicting the accused-appellant for the offences under Section 302 of IPC and sentencing him thereunder to undergo imprisonment for life is under challenge before this Court.2. Succinctly stated the case of the prosecution is that on 21-5-1995 the deceased Mangi Tirkey had been to village Kandeberna to witness Jatra. On the next day morning Rafel Ekka (P.W. 4). Tophil Kindo, Manbodh Bhairnsal (P.W. 10), the accused and the deceased took Handia in the house of Sarojini Toppo (P.W. 7). Sometime thereafter accused and deceased Mangri Tirkey went to the house of Raphel (P.W. 4) where again they took Handia. Thereafter, while the deceased, accused and P.W. 10 were returning to their respective villages through a pathway in Kandeberna jungle on the way accused by holding her hand dragged the deceased. Being annoyed the deceased dealt a slap on the accused, in retaliation the accused also slappe...
Tag this Judgment!Sri Sachindra Kumar Malla Vs. Director General, Central Industrial Sec ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jun-25-2007
Reported in: 104(2007)CLT830; [2008(116)FLR388]; 2007(II)OLR479
ORDER1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr. S.K. Das, learned Addl. Standing Counsel (Central).2. The petitioner in this writ petition has sought for a direction to the Opposite Parties to provide him appointment on Rehabilitation/ Compassionate ground on account of the death of his father while serving as a Security Guard in the Central Industrial Security Force Unit at FCI, Sindhri. The petitioner's father died due to stab injury in a scuffle in Sindhri while he was working as a Security Guard at Sindhri on 13.3.1976. As the petitioner was then a minor, he did not apply for compassionate appointment. He applied for compassionate appointment in the year 1995. His application for appointment on compassionate ground was considered and rejected by the Director General of CISF, HQ. (O.P.No. 1). The order of rejection communicated to the petitioner viade Annexure-1 dated 14.7.1997 is under challenge in this writ petition.3. The opposite parties have filed a counter affi...
Tag this Judgment!Ramesh Chandra Das Vs. Kishore Chandra Das and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jun-22-2007
Reported in: AIR2007Ori146
A.K. Ganguly, C.J.1. The main 'question on which both these appeals were argued is whether they are maintainable after the insertion of Section 100A in the Civil Procedure Code by its amendment in 2002.2. The material facts of the case are that both the appeals were filed by one Ramesh Chandra Das from the judgment and order dated 11 -10-2006 passed by a learned single Judge of this Court. Two appeals being F.A.O. No. 274 of 2006 and F.A.O. No. 286 of 2006 were filed from the order dated 3-7-2006 passed by the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Bhubaneswar in Title Suit No. 223 of 1990. By that order the learned trial Judge removed Ramesh Chandra Das, the appellant before us as Receiver and also declined to appoint any one of the plaintiffs as Receiver. By that order, the learned trial Judge also discharged defendant No. 1, Kishore Chandra Das from Receivership. That part of the order discharging him as a Receiver was challenged by Kishore Chandra in F.A.O. No. 274 of 2006.3. The learned J...
Tag this Judgment!Srikanta Nayak Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jun-21-2007
Reported in: 2007(II)OLR223
ORDERM.M. Das, J.1. Heard Mr. D.C. Mohanty, learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Counsel for the State. Perused the materials available on record as well as in the case diary produced by the learned Counsel for the State.2. This is an application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for grant of bail to the petitioner.3. An information was lodged on 23.10.2006 by the mother of the deceased in Sikhar Police Out Post before the concerned policeman in charge of the Out Post, inter alia, alleging that her daughter Smt. Kuni, aged about 18 years came out of her house at 7.00 P.M. on 22.10.2006 for answering the call of nature but did not return to the house till 8.00 P.M. As such, the informant and her other daughter went out in search of said Kuni, but could not find her. On the next date, i.e. 23.10.2006 she found drops of blood near the well in her Bari. The police thereafter came to the spot and the dead body of the daughter of the informant being found in the well situated in the Ba...
Tag this Judgment!Purna Chandra Sahoo Vs. Ghanashyam Sahoo and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jun-20-2007
Reported in: 104(2007)CLT148; 2007(11)OLR184
P.K. Tripathy, J.1. Petitioner is brother of Haramani Sahoo, the deceased Plaintiff in O.S. No. 22 of 1993 of the Court of Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Puri. She figured as Respondent No. 1 in Title Appeal No. 60 of 1999 of the Court of District Judge, Puri. On her death, Petitioner filed application for substitution. That was rejected by Learned District Judge as per the impugned order passed on 4.5.2002. As against that order, Petitioner filed Civil Revision No. 259 of 2002. In view of amendment of Section 115,C.P.C. in 2002, Petitioner has filed W.P.(C) No. 9878 of 2003 under Article 227 read with Article 226 of the Constitution of India as a matter of abundant caution. Thus, on consent of the parties, the Civil Revision and the Writ Petition were heard analogously and this common Judgment shall abide the result in both the cases.2. Harshamani, the original Plaintiff filed Title Suit No. 228 of 1993 claiming for decree of monthly maintenance @ Rs. 1,000/-from her husband, i.e., Defen...
Tag this Judgment!Tulasi Bewa and ors. Vs. Lilanka Sashi Ray and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jun-20-2007
Reported in: 104(2007)CLT145; 2007(11)OLR200
P.K. Tripathy, J.1. Order passed on 16.05.1998 by the Learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Banpur in M.J.C. No. 4 of 1991 and the confirming order passed on 6.2.1999 in Civil Revision No. 10 of 1998 by the Learned Addl. District Judge, Khurda are under challenge.2. Petitioners claim to be the legal representatives of late Rankanath Behera. Opposite Party members are the decree-holders being the heirs and successors of late Ananga Sashi Ray. The disputed property admittedly was recorded in the name of Ananga Sashi Ray. According to the case of Rankanath Behera, the said land was settled in his favour under Section 9 of the Orissa Land Reforms Act, 1960 (in short, 'OLR Act') as per order of Tahasildar, Banpur in O.L.R. Case No. 132 of 1970 and therefore, Title Suit No. 14 of 1980 filed by the Opposite Parties and the decree obtained therein for title and recovery of possession is not executable, inasmuch as, the jurisdiction of Civil Court was barred under Section 67 of the O.L.R. Act....
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »