Orissa Court January 2008 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.
Santilata Sahu Vs. Sabitri Sahu and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-25-2008
Reported in: AIR2008Ori86; 105(2008)CLT389; 2008(I)OLR870
Sanju Panda, J.1. Defendant No. 2 has filed this First Appeal challenging the Judgment and decree dated 27.2.1991 and 15.3.1991 respectively passed by the Learned Subordinate Judge, Sonepur in Title Suit No. 18 of 1982.2. The facts as narrated in the records are as follows;Respondent No. 1 as Plaintiff filed the suit claiming 1 /4th share out of the suit properties. He has attached a map showing the portion where the suit house has been constructed by her.Plaintiff's case is that, Jagatram was the common ancestor of the parties. He was owner in possession of the properties. After his death, Byasadev succeeded to the suit properties. Byasadev is the father of Plaintiff. He died leaving behind Defendant No. 1 his widow and two daughters, i.e., Plaintiff and Defendant No. 2, as his legal heirs. Other Defendants are coparceners. In the year 1971 while the father of the Plaintiff was alive, she out of her own income constructed the house on the suit land with consent of her parents and resi...
Kalandi Charan Sahoo Vs. District Transport Manager (A), O.S.R.T.C. an ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-25-2008
Reported in: 105(2008)CLT809; [2008(117)FLR831]; 2008(I)OLR893
ORDERM.M. Das, J.1. Heard Learned Counsel for the Petitioner, None appears for the contesting Opp. Party No. 1 in spite of the fact that notice of the writ petition has been duly served on him.2. This is an unfortunate case, where the workman has been deprived of the fruits of an order passed by the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Sambalpur in his favour on 7.9.94 although more than thirteen years have passed in the meanwhile.3. It is revealed from the writ petition that the Petitioner was working under the Orissa State Road Transport Corporation, Rourkela as a Conductor. He was discharged from the service on 30.6.1983. Being aggrieved, he preferred an application under Section 33A of the I.D. Act, 1947 before the Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal, Orissa, which was registered as Misc. Case No. 18 of 1983.4. After hearing both the parties, the Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal passed an order on 16.5.1984 holding the order of discharge of the Petitioner from service on 30.6....
Sunil Kumar Mohakud @ Mahakhuda and anr. Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-25-2008
Reported in: 2008(I)OLR744
S.C. Parija, J.1. This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioners challenging the order dated 19.06.2006 passed by the learned S.D.J.M.(S), Cuttack in G.R. Case No. 550 of 2006, taking cognizance against the petitioner under Section 160 I.P.C.The learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that neither the allegations made in the F.I.R. nor the statements of witnesses recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. during investigation reveal that there was any fight so as to constitute the offence of 'affray', as required under Section 160 I.P.C. and therefore, the initiation of criminal proceeding against them should be quashed. The petitioners further submit that the petitioner No. 2 is a school teacher and the petitioner No. 1 is a respected person of the society and the continuance of the criminal proceeding is baund to cause harassment and serious prejudice to them.2. The brief fact of the case is that a divorce case bearing C.P. No. 787 of 2005 was pending before...
Samimulla Khan and anr. Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-25-2008
Reported in: 2008CriLJ2375
S. Panda, J.1. This Criminal Appeal has been filed by the appellants who have been convicted under Section 302 read with Section 34, I.P.C. and sentenced them to undergo imprisonment for life vide judgment dated 24-6-1999 passed by the learned 2nd Addl. Sessions Judge, Cuttack in Sessions Trial No. 196 of 1997.2. Facts as alleged by the prosecution are that on 6-8-1996 at about 6 p.m. appellants chased and assaulted the deceased at Dargha Bazar by the side of the road of mosque locally known as Chhoti Maszid in a busy commercial centre of Cuttack. Immediately information was sent to police and on police requisition, the injured was shifted to SCB Medical College and Hospital, Cuttack for treatment. During the treatment, he succumbed to the injuries at about 7.12 a.m. on 7-8-1996. Samim, the brother of the deceased, got information from Sk. Babu that his brother was attacked by accused-Hira and Apun by knives by the side of Chhoti Maszid road. He immediately rushed to the spot and found...
Sarata @ Sarada Bhokta Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-25-2008
Reported in: 2008(II)OLR113
L. Mohapatra, J.1. The appellant has been convicted for commission of offences under Sections 302 and 498A of the Indian Penal Code (in short 'I.P.C.') by the learned Sessions Judge, Phulbani in S.T. Case No. 128 of 1995 for having exerted cruelty on his wife Jayanti Behera and committing her murder. The learned Sessions Judge has imposed sentence of life imprisonment with fine of Rs. 5,000/-- (five thousand) for commission of offence under Section 302 I.P.C. but no separate sentence has been imposed for commission of offence under Section 498A, I.P.C.2. The case of the prosecution is that the deceased Jayanti Bhukta is the daughter of P.Ws. 1 and 2. She had married the appellant in or around 1.993-94. The deceased was subjected to cruelty in her matrimonial house and she was complaining of such cruelty whenever she used to visit her parental house. On one occasion, because of such torture at the hands of the appellant, the deceased preferred to stay back in her parental house and only...
Mitra S.K. Private Limited Vs. Inspectorate Griffith (India) Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-22-2008
Reported in: 2008(3)ARBLR158(Orissa); 105(2008)CLT520
A.S. Naidu, J.1 The Order Dated December 18, 2007 passed by the District Judge, Cuttack in Arbitration Petition No. 207 of 2007 is assailed in this appeal filed under Section 37(1)(a) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1976 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act').2. The Appellant was the Petitioner before the Court below and it had filed a petition under Section 9 of the Act seeking an order of injunction restraining the Respondent, which was Opposite Party before the Court below, from interfering with or disturbing in the right of the Appellant in carrying on its business, in terms of an agreement dated December 14, 2001 entered into between the parties, until adjudication of the dispute by an Arbitral Tribunal.3. Bereft of unnecessary details, the short facts necessary for appreciating the respective cases of the parties are as follows:The Appellant a private limited company commonly known as M/s. Mitra S.K. Pvt. Ltd. ( hereinafter referred to as ' MSK') was incorporated in the ...
Rabindra Kumar Satpathy Vs. Oreda
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-22-2008
Reported in: 2008(II)OLR604
ORDER1. Heard Dr. A.K. Rath, learned Counsel for the petitioners and Mr B.K. Dash, learned Counsel for the O.Ps. The petitioners being fifty-five in number who are working as Technicians under the Orissa Renewable Energy Development Agency (in short, 'OREDA') have filed this writ application with a prayer to direct the O.Ps. to create adequate promotional avenues for them2. The case of the petitioners is that the petitioners joined the services under the establishment of OREDA as Technicians during the period between 1984 and 1986. Petitioner Nos. 1, 27, 35, 37 and 51 came from the Agricultural Department of the State Government on deputation and were later on permanently absorbed as Technicians on 1.5.1984. Since the date of their joining, the petitioners have been working as such and as there was no promotional avenue available for them, they filed the present writ application for the relief indicated above.3. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the O.Ps., wherein the eng...
Ramesh Chandra Nayak Vs. State of Orissa and Five ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-18-2008
Reported in: 2008(I)OLR331
ORDERI. Mahanty, J.In this writ application, the petitioner has sought to challenge the order dated 13.09.2007 passed by the Commissioner-cum Secretary to Govt. of Orissa Food, Supplies and Consumer Welfare Department in Appeal Case No. 11 of 2007 (vide Annexure -11) which has passed in an appeal arising out of a proceeding under Clause 14 of the OPDS (Control) Order, 2002.1. The Appellate Authority in the impugned order has come to the following findings:5. In the circumstances I find that the order of the learned Collector is defective in so far as some grounds not mentioned in the show cause notice have been relied upon by the learned Collector while refusing to renew his licence and that, though adverse reports of some functionaries have been referred to in the impugned order as grounds of the refusal copies thereof had not been communicated to the appellant to enable him to show cause on such grounds.After reaching the aforesaid conclusion, the Appellate Authority has further give...
Abhaya Parichha and ors. Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-18-2008
Reported in: 2008(1)OLR372
R.N. Biswal, J.1. Heard the argument in full and the following judgment is passed.The appellants, four in number, assail the judgment and order dated 21.12.1993 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Paralakhemundi in S.T. Case No. 26 of 1992 (S.T. Case No. 98 of 1992 G.D.C.) convicting the accused-appellants namely Abhaya Parichha, Siba Paik and Prafulla Paik for the offence under Sections 147 and 332 of I.P.C. and sentencing each them to undergo R.I. for two years and the accused-appellant Hallium Nayak for the offence under Sections 147/332/149 of I.P.C. and sentencing him to under R.I. for one year for the offence under Sections 147/149 of I.P.C. and R.I. for same period for the offence under Sections 332/149 of I.P.C.2. The case, as delineated by the prosecution, is that on 21.10.1990 being directed by P.W.10, the O.I.C. Mohana Police Station, Sri Padmanav Panigrahi, A.S.I. of the said P.S. (P.W.1) proceeded to village Chandiput to enquire into the allegation regarding killin...
Rama Chandra Sishu Vs. State of Orissa and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-18-2008
Reported in: 2008(1)OLR471
A.S. Naidu, J.1. The petitioner is a land owner who is aggrieved by the incorrect recording of his land in the Hal record-of-rights. He intended to file a Revision before the Commissioner of Consolidation and Settlement at Cuttack, but as the Commissioner refused to accept his Revision Petition in view of the Notification dated 15th November, 2007 (Annexure-6) issued by the State Government he has been constrained to approach this Court.2. For the sake of brevity and better appreciation the impugned Notification dated 15th November, 2007 is quoted hereinbelow:GOVERNMENT OF ORISSA REVENUE & DISASTERMANAGEMENT DEPARTMENTNOTIFICATIONDated Bhubaneswar the 15th November, 2007No. S-72/05-45030-R&DM.; In exercise of the powers conferred by Section 47 of the Orissa Survey and Settlement Act, 1958 (Orissa Act 3 of 1959) and in partial modification of this Department Notification No. 59363-R, dated the 4th December, 1999; No. 46798 dated the 4th October, 2000 and No. 64141-R dated the 24th Decem...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »