Orissa Court September 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.
Sri Chintamoni Das Vs. the Joint Commissioner, Settlement and Consolid ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-13-2007
Reported in: 2007(II)OLR710
P.K. Tripathy, J.1. Heard further argument from the parties, hearing is concluded and the judgment is as follows.2. Sri Madhusudan Jena, son of Krutibas Jena, opposite party No. 1 in this writ petition filed application under Section 9(3) of the Orissa Consolidation of Holdings and Prevention of Fragmentation of Land Act, 1972 (in short Consolidation Act') with the prayer to record the disputed property of Consolidation Plot Nos. 17 and 43 respectively measuring Ac. 0.20 decimals and Ac. 0.22 decimals in his favour on the ground that the said property belongs to his family, his late father Krutibas executed a deed of mortgage (it should be deed of security) for a loan taken from Chintamoni Das, who was opposite party in that claim case and that the registered sale deed of the year 1971 be construed accordingly and, apart from that, the objector remained in possession of the property all throughout asserting his right and interest over the same.3. Chintamoni Das, the opposite party in t...
Arnapurna Tripathy Vs. Commissioner, Consolidation and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-13-2007
Reported in: 105(2008)CLT478
ORDERA.S. Naidu, J.1. Heard.The Order Dated 25-1-2006 (Annexure-3) passed by the Joint Commissioner of Consolidation in Consolidation Revision No. 126 of 2004 is assailed in this Writ Petition. The said Revision Case had been filed under Section 36 of the Orissa Consolidation of Holdings and Prevention of Fragmentation of Land Act, 1972. It appears that after the village in which the disputed lands situated came within the purview of the aforesaid Act, Objection Cases were filed before the concerned Consolidation Officer who directed to record the disputed lands in favour of the Petitioner. Being aggrieved by the said order of the Consolidation Officer the present opposites 3 and 4 preferred an appeal before the Deputy Director, Bhadrak. Both sides, as it appears from the order-sheets, entered into compromise at the Appellate stage and on the basis of their compromise the Deputy Director disposed of the appeal on compromise. The said order of the Deputy Director was not assailed in rev...
State of Orissa Vs. Chaitana Rajhansa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-13-2007
Reported in: 2008CriLJ946
R.N. Biswal, J.1. This appeal has been preferred by the State against the judgment and order dated 9-8-1991 passed by the Addl. Sessions Judge, Sambalpur in Sessions Trial No. 29/4 of 1991 wherein he acquitted the accused of the offence under Section 376 of I. P. C.2. The laconic fact of the prosecution case is that on 29-10-1990 at about 12.00 noon while P. W. 3, a young girl of about 14 years was tending her cattle at Pathurikhol jungle, the accused arrived there and asked her to drive away the cattle which were grazing on an arhar field and no sooner she did so, he came from her back side, physically lifted her and carried her on his shoulder to the arhar field, led her down on the ground, squeezed her breasts, undraped her cloth and committed sexual intercourse on her. When the victim raised hullah, he threatened to throttle her unless she kept quiet and accordingly out of fear she remained silent., After satisfying his lust the accused left the victim high and dry and went away. S...
State of Orissa Vs. Iswar Chandra Pradhan
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-13-2007
Reported in: 105(2008)CLT493
S. Panda, J.1. This is an appeal under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') against the award dated 25.2.2000 passed by the Learned Civil Judge (Sr. Divn.), Deograrh, in Land Acquisition Misc. Case No. 18 of 2000.2. The brief facts of the case leading to this appeal are stated herein below:The Government of Orissa proposed to acquire an extent of Ac.5.75 decimals of land from Khata No. 26 in village Banakola under Naikul Barkot Police Station for the purpose of Rengali Dam Project for which a Notification under Section 4(i) of the Act dated 27.8.1976 was published in the Orissa Gazette EOG No. 65185 dated 30.10.1978. The land acquired consists of agricultural land, gharabari and an orchard measuring an area of Ac.5.12 decimals, Ac.0.20 decimals and Ac.0.43 decimals respectively. The Land Acquisition Officer-cum-Collector, Deogarh awarded a total sum of Rs. 39,579.05 p. out of which Rs. 20,551/- for agricultural land, Rs. 14,691.67 p. for house a...
Manoranjan Khatua Vs. Mahanadi Coal Fields Ltd. and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-12-2007
Reported in: 104(2007)CLT652; [2008(116)FLR150]; (2008)ILLJ976Ori
I. Mahanty, J.1. The Petitioner Manoranjan Khatua has filed the present writ application seeking to challenge the order of termination of his service dated 9.1.1997 (Annexure-1) issued by the Deputy General Manager (M.P. & R)-O.P. No. 2 terminating his services as Laboratory Technician.2. Mahanadi Coal Field Ltd., a subsidiary of Coal India Ltd. issued an advertisement for filling up the post of Laboratory Technician and the Petitioner made the necessary application for being considered for the said post and also appeared at the written test held on 25.6.1994 conducted by Opposite Party No. 1. Thereafter, a practical test and personal interview were held on 30.9.1994 and on being found suitable for appointment, Opposite Party No. 2 vide his letter No. 424 dated 13.4.1995 (Annexure-5) was pleased to offer an appointment to the Petitioner in the post of Laboratory Technician '(Trainee) on the terms and conditions contained in the said letter. It is further averred that pursuant to the sa...
Satya Sundar Tripathi Vs. Mamata Tripathi
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-12-2007
Reported in: 2007(II)OLR668
ORDER1. This petition has been filed before this Court under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India for quashing the order dated 18.7.2007 passed by the learned Judge, Family Court, Cuttack in Civil Proceeding No. 782 of 2004.2. The present dispute is between two private individuals relating to family affairs, which cannot be the subject matter of a writ petition. Apart from that, in a family Court proceeding, the question is one of granting remedy in personal law. The writ petition being a proceeding for a remedy in public law as held by the Supreme Court in number of judgments, the petition under Article 226 against the order of Judge, Family Court is not maintainable. Therefore, it is treated under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.3. It has been held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court time and again that the power under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has to be exercised very sparingly inasmuch as under Article 227, the High Court has been given merely the powe...
Bhagaban Mohapatra Vs. Vice Chancellor, Orissa University of Agricultu ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-12-2007
Reported in: 105(2008)CLT577
A.S. Naidu, J.1. The Petitioner was selected and appointed temporarily as Grade-II Assistant in the College of Orissa University of Agriculture & Technology on 28.2.1970. The authorities being satisfied with his service on 29.1.1976 promoted him to the post of Grade-II Assistant in the scale of pay of Rs. 320-450/-.On 5.11.1977 the Petitioner was promoted to the post of Head Clerk in the scale of pay of Rs. 320-450/-.On 31.12.1977 the Petitioner was relieved from the post of Store Keeper to enable him to join as Head Clerk in the Department of Horticulture, College of Agriculture. While the. matter stood thus, on 11.2.1981 a common gradation list of Head Clerks was prepared and in the said gradation list, the name of the Petitioner found place at SI. No. 3. In the year 1981 one Mahadeb Sahu and two others filed O.J.C. No. 665 of 1981 before this Court with a prayer to treat them equivalent to Grade-I Assistants working under the same University and also to treat them as seniors to Oppo...
Sri Mayur Biscuits Co. (P) Ltd. Vs. Sales Tax Officer and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-11-2007
Reported in: (2009)20VST330(Orissa)
1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.2. Pursuant to our previous order, records have been produced today by the learned Counsel for the Revenue.3. On a perusal of the records, we find that the Tribunal admittedly has not issued any notice to the assessee prior to making an enhancement in the impugned order passed by it on March 16, 2007. The order of the Tribunal, reveals that no notice was issued relating to appeal of the previous order which is indicated at paragraph 8 of the said order. The said paragraph 8 is set out below:8. In the aforesaid perspective we are of the firm finding that the assessment order of the learned STO and the appeal order of the learned ACST confirming the assessment order were not correctly/properly framed because the appellant had availed more exemption for a sum of Rs. 2,56,461 but not exhibited in the admitted figure on this count for the year 1995-96 against total eligible amount of Rs. 75,15,750 for the period from October 19, 1994 to October 18, 1...
Maddi Sreeramulu and Sons (Huf) Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-10-2007
Reported in: 104(2007)CLT631; (2007)212CTR(Ori)265; 2007(II)OLR566
I. Mahanty, J.1. The petitioner M/s. Maddi Sreeramulu & Sons (HUF) filed the present application under Section 256(2) of the Income tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act') against the order dated 5.3.1990 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Cuttack Bench, Cuttack in reference Application No. 151/CTK/1989 relating to the assessment year 1976-77.2. This Court vide order dated 7.9.1992 has been pleased to admit this application on the following question of law:Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the initiation of the proceeding under Section 147(a) of the Income Tax Act was valid?3. Subsequent thereto, the Income Tax Appollate Tribunal in compliance of the directions contained in the aforesaid order of the Court sent the statement of the case for consideration of this Court.4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner Mr. G.N.Padhi submits that this case arises out of the search conducted by a Police Party at the premises of the assessee-petitioner on 17.9.1975 and on ...
Nilachal Service Station Vs. Presiding Officer, Labour Court and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-10-2007
Reported in: (2008)IILLJ95Ori
A.K. Ganguly, C.J.1. The management of Nilachal Service Station, (Indian Oil Petrol Pump), Grand Road, Puri has filed this writ appeal challenging the judgment dated June 20, 2005 passed by a learned Judge of the writ Court in O.J.C. No. 14546/2001 wherein the learned Judge was pleased to dismiss the writ petition by a reasoned judgment. The present appellant was the petitioner before the writ Court and the writ petition was filed challenging dismissal of a restoration application which was registered as Misc. Case No. 12/2000 by the Labour Court, Bhubaneswar in respect of an ex parte award passed against the petitioner.2. The material facts are that an industrial dispute was raised by respondent No. 2 -workman challenging the legality of his termination from service by the management of Nilachal Service Station. The dispute was referred to the Labour Court by the State Government in exercise of powers conferred on it under the Industrial Disputes Act. The said reference runs as follow...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »