Orissa Court June 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.
Prafulla Kumar Mishra Vs. Dr. Narendra Prasad Mishra and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jun-19-2007
Reported in: 2007(II)OLR153
R.N. Biswal, J.1. The order dated 5.12.2006 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Sambalpur in Criminal Revision No. 58 of 2006 is under challenge in this CRLMC.2. The facts, sans unnecessary details leading to filing of the present case is that opp. party No. 1 filed I.C.C. No. 18 of 2006 against petitioner and his wife Smt. Rajeswari Mishra, the pro forma opp. party before the S.D.J.M., Sambalpur on the allegation that they committed offence under Sections 341/342/352/448/380/402 of I.P.C. and prayed for taking suitable action against them. As per the complaint petition, opp. party No. 1 was living in the first floor of his ancestral house bearing Municipal holding No. 79 of Ward No. 13, Jharuapara, Sambalpur Town, standing over plot Nos. 1306 and 1307 appertaining to khata No. 1182 of Sambalpur town Unit No. 6, Golebazar, while his brother, the petitioner and his wife (opp. party No. 2) were staying in the ground floor of the said house. The first floor of the house is separated fro...
Bidyadhar Palo @ Pal Vs. Smt. Bishnupriya Palo
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jun-19-2007
Reported in: 2007(II)OLR141
R.N. Biswal, J.1. In this CRLMC, the petitioner-husband challenges the order dated 6.9.2002 passed by the 1st Addl. Sessions Judge, Berhampur in Crl. Revision petition No. 14 of 2002 confirming the order dated 1.12.2000 passed by the S.D.J.M. Berhampur in Misc. Case No. 3 of 1995, awarding maintenance of Rs. 500/- per month, in favour of the opp. party-wife payable from the date of application i.e. 22.12.1995.2. The case of the opp. party-wife as per the petition under Section 125 of C.P.C. before the S.D.J.M., Berhampur is that she married the petitioner husband in accordance with their caste custom in the year 1982. They lived as wife and husband in the matrimonial home in village Hatasasan. But to her great misfortune she found the petitioner-husband an alcoholic and all most every day he used to return home in drunken state and assault the opp. party-wife and as and when he met her father he asked for money on the pretext of starting a business. On two occasions her father paid him...
Kandru Murmu Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jun-19-2007
Reported in: 2008(I)OLR116
1. Heard and the judgment is as follows:Accused faced trial for the offence under Section 302 IPC on the allegation of committing murder of his wife by severing her head on the suspicion of practising witchcraft. The occurrence took place on 29.10.1994. At about 2.30 P.M. on that day accused was found moving towards the police station with the severed head of his wife and a bloodstained axe. On the way he made extra judicial confession before the witnesses and thereafter in the police station deposited the head and the axe. The aforesaid aspect put the Investigating Officer into action and thereafter without probing much he completed the investigation citing few people as witnesses to the occurrence and few to prove extra judicial confession. The seized weapon and' the blood stained wearing apparels of the accused together with the blood stained apparels of the deceased were sent for chemical analysis and the confirming report-Exts. 10 and 11 was received from the Science Laboratory. I...
Jyotsnarani Mishra Alias Mohapatra Vs. Purna Chandra Misra
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jun-18-2007
Reported in: 104(2007)CLT160; 2007(II)OLR120
A.S. Naidu, J. 1. The petitioner is defendant No. 1 in T.S. No. 123 of 1999 pending in the Court of the Civil Judge (SD), Dhenkanal. The said suit has been filed by the opposite party as the sole plaintiff. In course of proceeding of the suit the plaintiff filed a petition under Order 26, Rule 9 of the Code of Civil Procedure with a prayer to depute a survey-knowing commissioner for the purpose to (1) measure the Hal plot Nos. 256 and 257 with reference to Sabike plot No. 263; (2) to investigate and report as to whether the petitioner was in possession, of the land between plot No. 256 and plot No. 257; (3) to submit a report with regard to length and breadth of the existing vacant land; and (4) to investigate as to physical possession of the parties with regard to Hal plot Nos. 256 and 257. The said petition was allowed by the trial Court. Being aggrieved by the order of the trial Court the present petitioner filed W.P.(C) No. 11553 of 2003 before this Court. This Court disposed of th...
Ramahari Acharya Vs. Krupasindhu Acharya and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jun-18-2007
Reported in: 104(2007)CLT473; 2007(II)OLR255
A.S. Naidu, J.1. The order dated 19.4.2000 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Bhadrak in Execution Case No. 66 of 1995 is assailed by the petitioner.2. Opposite Party No. 1 as plaintiff filed T.S No. 174/1988. The said suit was decreed on 07.2.1995 and the defendants were directed to allow the plaintiff by way of mandatory injunction to go over their courtyard to thatch and repair the house during the thatching season as the plaintiff had got easementary/right of path by necessity. The trial Court rejected the prayer of the plaintiff to issue mandatory injunction to demolish the construction of the house of the defendants by themselves and also rejected the prayer to declare his right, title and interest over the 'Ka' schedule land.3. No appeal was preferred against the said decree and it has attained finality. While matter stood thus, opposite party No. 1 plaintiff/ decree holder filed Execution Case No. 66 of 1995 in the Court of learned Civil Judge (Junior Division...
Kamalakanta Giri and ors. Vs. Atula Kumar Giri
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jun-18-2007
Reported in: 2007(II)OLR259
A.S. Naidu, J.1. Circumventing the provision of Sub-section (3) of Section 397 of Cr.P.C. this Criminal Misc. Case has been filed invoking inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the. Cr.P.C. According to the opposite party he had purchased the disputed land from his uncle Ainthu Giri by a registered sale deed dtd.17th April, 1982 and since that date he is in peaceful possession thereof. It is alleged that the present petitioners without having any right, title, interest and possession over the said lands created disturbance in the possession of the opposite party for first time on 9th July, 1987 and threatened to assault and murder the opposite party. Consequently the opposite party filed a petition under Section 145 of the Cr.P.C. before the Executive Magistrate, which was registered as Crl. Misc. Case No. 486/1989.2. The present petitioners who were members of second party before the Executive Magistrate took the stand that the disputed land was the ancestral joint ...
Pramod Kumar Rath Vs. Aditya Steel Industries Ltd.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jun-18-2007
Reported in: 2007CriLJ3440; 2007(II)OLR227
A.S. Naidu, J.1. Invoking inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code the petitioner seeks to assaii the order dated 06.3.2002 passed by the learned S.D.J.M. (S), Cuttack in I (C) C.C No. 317 of 2001 taking cognizance of offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881 (here-in-after called 'the Act') and issued summons to the accused.2. Bereft of unnecessary details, the short facts as would be evident from the complaint petition filed by the opposite party, reveal that the complainant is the manufacturer of steel rods. The accused being a Super class Contractor on regular business transactions with the complainant used to purchase steel rods from the complainant availing credit facilities starting from 21st February, 1988 till 24th May, 2000. It was alleged that the accused had issued a cheque on 30 March, 2001 for a sum of Rs. 1,37,000/- drawn on Bank of India, Sahid Nagar Branch, Bhubaneswar. The said cheque was deposited by the complainan...
Smt. Suprava Mohanty Vs. Sanat Kumar Das
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jun-18-2007
Reported in: 2007(II)OLR243
A.S. Naidu, J.1. The order dated 4.11.2006 passed by the District Judge, Balasore in Misc. Case No. 31 of 2006 is assailed in this Writ Petition. According to the petitioner she married the opposite party according to caste customs on 7.12.2001. Initially the couple led a blissful married life but later on dissension cropped up. The opposite party-husband filed a petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act before the Civil Judge (SD), Balasore praying for dissolution of marriage by way of divorce. The said petition was registered as C.S.(MAT) No. 647 of 20044 which is sub judice.2. It appears from records that the said suit was posted to 2.3.2006 for reconciliation among the parties but that could not be materialized as the parties declined to live together. On the said date a Memorandum was filed by the petitioner-wife intimating the Court that while she was coming to Court the opposite party-husband threatening to murder her, attempted to kidnap her. Thereafter she filed a pe...
Steel Authority of India Ltd. Vs. Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribun ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jun-18-2007
Reported in: [2007(115)FLR52]; 2007(II)OLR245
A.S. Naidu, J.1. Invoking jurisdiction under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner seeks to assail the order dtd.29th July, 1993 passed by Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal, Bhubaneswar in Industrial Dispute Misc. Case No. 1/1989.2. Bereft of unnecessary details, the short facts which are necessary for appreciating the dispute are that:Opposite Party No. 2 was a helper in the Loco Maintenance Section, Traffic and Raw-material Department of Rourkela Steel Plant, Rourkela. It is alleged that on 9th August, 1988 he committed theft of two pieces of traction motor brass holders and one hammer from the company's premises. He was caught red-handed by the Security staff present near the Gate and the stolen articles were recovered from his possession. Theft of Company's property being a misconduct, he was issued with a charge sheet and was called upon to submit his show cause reply, if any. He submitted his show cause reply and the same being found unsatisfactor...
Tahasildar Vs. Sri Madhusudan Parida and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jun-18-2007
Reported in: 2007(II)OLR348
ORDER1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.2. This writ appeal has been filed by the Tahasildar, Bhubaneswar, as the appellant, impugning the order dated 13.7.2005 passed by the learned Judge of the writ Court in W.P.(C) No. 6486 of 2005. By the said order, the learned Judge of the writ Court virtually allowed the writ petition.3. It may be mentioned in this connection that the writ petition in question was presented before this Court on 13.5.2005 and it appeared before the learned Judge on 11.7.2005 and on that date the learned Judge directed the listing of the matter before His Lordship on 13.7.2005. On 13.7,2005 itself the learned Judge disposed of the writ petition by the impugned judgment. It may be noted that though the learned Counsel for the State was present before the learned Judge of the writ Court, both on 11.7.2005 and 13.7.2005, no direction was given for filing of any counter affidavit.4. From a perusal of the order passed by the learned Judge of the writ Court, which...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »