Orissa Court November 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.
Purna Chandra Pattnaik Vs. State of Orissa and Two ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Nov-28-2008
Reported in: [2009(121)FLR376]; 2009(I)OLR243
B.S. Chauhan, C.J.1. This writ petition has been filed for quashing the impugned order dated 1.12.1998 (Annex-1) by which the punishment order had been passed against the petitioner after holding Disciplinary Proceedings.2. The facts and circumstances giving rise to the case are that the petitioner the then Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate (SDJM) was served with a charge sheet containing nine charges of granting bail for extraneous consideration when he was posted at Nawarangpur. For that purpose, this Court appointed the Enquiring Officer, who after completing the enquiry meeting all the requirement of law and principles of natural justice submitted the Enquiry Report dated 20.10.1997 exonerating the petitioner from all the charges. The Enquiry Report was considered by this Court on administrative side. The Court cautioned the officer and asked to be careful in future, he was kept under observation. It was directed that these facts be reflected in his C.C.Rs. Further the period duri...
Shri Pyarimohan Mohapatra Vs. State of Orissa and Three ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Nov-28-2008
Reported in: 2009(I)OLR319
ORDERB.K. Patel, J.CRLMC No.2191 of 2008andMlic. Case No.1769 of 20081. This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the impugned order dated 29.8.2008 passed in I.C.C. No. 2855 of 2005 by the learned S.D.J.M., Bhubaneswar rejecting the prayer for withdrawal of the complaint petition instituted by the petitioner against opposite parties 2,3 and 4.2. Mr. B. Panda, counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Counsel for opposite party No. 1 the State, Shri S.C. Mohapatra, learned Counsel for the opposite parties 2 and 4 and Shri A.K. Mohapatra (1), learned Counsel for the opposite party No. 3 were heard.3. It appears that in the present case opposite parties 2, 3 and 4 are being proceeded for alleged commission of offences under Sections 469/471/500/501/502/34 I.P.C. It also further appears from the depositions of the complainant and his witnesses that dispute between the parties has been settled on compromise. Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner as w...
Shri Rajkishore Satapathy Vs. Chairman-cum-managing Director Indian Dr ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Nov-27-2008
Reported in: 2009(1)OLR70
S.R. Singharavelu, J.1. Challenging the action of the opposite party No. 2 vide Office Memorandum dated 28.11.2006 rolling back the age of the retirement of the petitioner from 62 to 58 years and consequentially also challenging the superannuation notice dated 29.11.2006 issued to the petitioner, this writ was filed.2. The main grounds of challenge in the writ application are as follows:The respondent-company is a joint sector of IDPL and IPICOL having respective shares. The petitioner was initially recruited in the year 1992 as an Executive. He was delegated with the power of Chief Executive with disciplinary powers from May 2003 to July 2006. The age of retirement was raised from 58 to 60 by two office memorandums dated 17.8.1998 & 21.8.1998 of the D.P.E. It was also extended to Public Sector Enterprisers. It was provided that in case any public sector undertaking does not want to increase the age of retirement to 60 years, specific exemption from the operation of the said decision w...
National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Baby Tabbassum and ors. and Wazda Khat ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Nov-26-2008
Reported in: 2009(I)OLR424
A.S. Naidu, J.1. As both the appeals involve same facts and points of law, the same are heard together with consent of learned Counsel for the parties and this common judgment disposes of both the Writ Petitions.2. The appellant-National Insurance Company Ltd., has filed M.A. Nos.260 and 261 of 2002 under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 challenging the common award dated 04.12.2001 passed by the learned Second Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Northern Division, Sambalpur in Misc. (A) Case Nos.99 of 1990 (SN) and 100 of 1990 (SN) respectively.3. The scenario of facts reveals that dn 27.2.1990 Istak Ansari and Md. Iqbal Ansari were travelling in a truck (dumper) bearing registration No.ORJ-7297 along with their goods after closure of the Hat. The said truck, it was alleged, was driven in a rash and negligent manner. Consequently it met with an accident and capsized. Istak Ansari died at the spot whereas Md. Iqbal Ansari sustained fatal injuries and inspite of best treatment hi...
Chandramohan Sahu Alias Chandramohan Saw Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Nov-25-2008
Reported in: 2009CriLJ1070
1. Heard further argument from the parties, hearing is concluded and the Judgment is as follows.2. Appellant challenges the order of conviction under Sections 302/392/397/468, I.P.C. and the respective sentences of imprisonment for life, rigorous imprisonment for 14 years, rigorous imprisonment for seven years and rigorous imprisonment for three years with a direction to serve such sentences consecutively, as per the impugned judgment delivered on 16-3-1998 by learned Sessions Judge, Mayurbhanj at Baripada in S.T. Case No 113 of 1995.3. The following facts emerging from the trial Court's record are mostly not in dispute.(i) A full-body truck bearing Registration No. BR 16-A-0795 was belonging to Satwant Singh (P.W. 14). Under hire purchase agreement Sudam Singh (hereinafter referred to as deceased No. 1) had taken possession of that truck and was driving the same.(ii) Deceased No. 1 (Sudam Singh), Dharmadeo Singh Yadav (deceased No. 2) and Bhikari Pandit (deceased No. 3) had gone from ...
Indian Aluminum Company Ltd. Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Nov-24-2008
Reported in: 2009(1)OLR51; [2009]91SCL119(NULL)
B.N. Mahapatra, J.1. The Orissa Sales Tax Tribunal, Cuttack (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal') has referred the following two questions of law under Section 24(1) of Orissa Sales Tax Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as 'OST Act') at the behest of the petitioner-Indian Aluminum Company Limited.(1) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, stock transfer of manufactured products to other State prepared out of raw-materials purchased on the strength of Form-IV could attract the mischief of the provisions contained in fifth proviso to Section 5(1) of the Orissa Sales Tax Act?(2) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in treating a sum of Rs. 6,05,803/- being the amount of subsidy paid in running the canteen, as receipt of sale price or valuable consideration for the alleged sale of food stuffs to the workers?2. Shorn of unnecessary details, the brief facts of the case are that during the year 1984-85 the dealer-petitioner ...
Akhar Ali and anr. Vs. Fatima Bibi
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Nov-24-2008
Reported in: 108(2009)CLT471; 2009(II)OLR224
S.R. Singharavelu, J.1. Heard the learned Counsel for both parties.2. Defendant is the petitioner, whose daughter as plaintiff had filed the suit claiming right, title and interest based upon a will dated 5.11.1987 said to have been executed by the defendants' mother Idan Bibi in favour of the plaintiff. Idan Bibi admittedly expired. The writ petitioners/ defendants in their written statement challenged the execution of the said will which was the fulcrum of the suit claim.3. A device by the defendants to agitate the said will was to contend that the testator died on 5.6.1984 long back the date of the will which is 5.11.1987. This is a matter of evidence which may not require amendment of pleadings. Aggrieved by the dismissal of the amendment petition regarding date and death, this writ petition has been filed by the defendants.4. After hearing the learned Counsel for both parties what is made clear is that when suit claim was based upon a will, that will was denied in the written stat...
The Union of India (Uoi) and ors. Vs. Sri Pradipta Kumar Jena and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Nov-21-2008
Reported in: [2009(121)FLR374]; 2009(I)OLR316
I. Mahanty, J.1. In the present writ application, the Union of India has sought to challenge the judgment dated 9.8.2001 passed in O.A. No. 483 of 1995 by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Cuttack Bench, Cuttack allowing the same and directing that the applicant, namely, Pradipta Kumar Jena-Opp.Party No. 1 who had been appointed as 'Postman' under the 'Compassionate Appointment Scheme' is entitle to the post of 'Postal Assistant'.2. Learned Counsel for the Union of India, inter alia, submitted that the applicant-Opp.Party No. Vs father retired on invalidation on 4.11.1993 while he was serving the Department and the Circle Relaxation Committee in their meeting/proceeding dated 23.11.1994 approved the compassionate appointment of Opp.Party No. 1 under the Postman cadre. It was further submitted that the applicant was duly trained and joined in the post of Postman on 6.1.1995. The case of the applicant/O.P. No. 1 was that, although, he had joined as Postman under the compassionate appo...
Kali Charan Mohanta Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Nov-20-2008
Reported in: 2009(1)OLR167
L. Mohapatra, J.1. This writ application is directed against the judgment and order passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Cuttack Bench, Cuttack in O.A. No. 212 of 2000 disposed of on 30.8.2001. Opp. party No. 3 before this Court was the applicant before the Tribunal. The present petitioner was respondent No. 3 before the Tribunal.2. In response to notification dated 22.8.1995 for appointment to the post of Extra Departmental Branch Post Master (EDBPM), Bartania Branch Office, the petitioner, opposite party No. 3 and four others submitted their applications. The present petitioner was selected in the selection process and was given appointment. Challenging his selection and appointment to the post of EDBPM* the present opposite party No. 3 filed O.A. before the Tribunal. The ground taken before the Tribunal was that the applicant had secured more marks than the present petitioner in H.S.C. Examination and had fulfilled the rest of the requirement for such appointment and, ther...
Bhagyalaxmi Powerloom Unit Vs. State of Orissa and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Nov-20-2008
Reported in: AIR2009Ori82; 2009(1)OLR33
B.S. Chauhan, C.J.1. The petition is pending before this Court for more than 10 years challenging the demand notice issued on 31st August, 1998 for a sum of Rs. 3,35,672.40 p. The Orissa State Financial Corporation (for short, 'Corporation') did not muster the courage to make recovery of the public money. A sum of Rs. 51,960/- was advanced to a partnership firm of which one Mr. Durga Madhab Patnaik was the sole proprietor vide order dated 10th February, 1982. As per the terms of agreement for sanction of loan, the entire amount had to be paid in 7 1/2 years in 13 half-yearly instalments. The entire amount had to be deposited by the month of August, 1989, but not a single pie had been deposited by said Durga Madhab Patnaik. The Corporation was kind enough not to initiate the proceeding for making recovery of the loan amount. Instead, the Corporation accepted the application made by the said borrower Durga Madhab Patnaik that the loan be shifted in the name of his wife as she became the ...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »