Orissa Court December 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.
Kamalakanta Mohanty Vs. Laxmikanta Mohanty and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Dec-02-2008
Reported in: 107(2009)CLT63
S.R. Singharavelu, J.1. This Writ Petition was filed against the impugned Order Dated 16.7.2008 by the Learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Bhubaneswar in his Execution Case No. 47 of 2003 whereby the Order Dated 9.11.2006 passed by his predecessor allowing transfer of ownership of suit house in favour of decree holder was recalled and the parties were relegated to the stage of execution, that was done in order to enforce the orders of this Court in W.P. (C) No. 1374 of 2006.2. The Writ Petitioner as Plaintiff filed a suit in T.S. No. 79 of 1998 on the file of the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Bhubaneswar for mandatory injunction to direct his brother-(O.R No. 1 (Defendant No. 1) to abide by the agreement between the two and to transfer the land allotted to him by Bhubaneswar Development Authority (O.P. No. 2- Defendant No. 2) in favour of Petitioner-Plaintiff or in the alternative to repay a sum of Rs. 3,60,000 which was received by Defendant No. 1 from Plaintiff for the purpose of...
Sanjukta Sahoo Vs. Sailabala Mishra and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Dec-02-2008
Reported in: AIR2009Ori62; 107(2009)CLT32
A.S. Naidu, J.1. The Order Dated 25th July, 2008 (Annexure-1) passed by the Learned Civil Judge (SD), Talcher in Execution Case No. 2 of 2002 is assailed in this Writ Petition.2. Bereft of unnecessary details, the facts of the case are Title Suit No. 9 of 1979/2 of 1982 was flied by that Respondent No. 16 in the Court of the then Subordinate Judge, Talcher. The said suit was one for declaration of right, title and interest in respect of the suit property and for recovery of possession thereof. The suit was decreed. The said decree was assailed in Title Appeal No. 1 of 1995 before the District Judge, Dhenkanal. The Appellate Court confirmed the Judgment and decree of the Trial Court and dismissed the appeal. The confirming Judgment of the Appellate Court was assailed before this Court in Second Appeal No. 23 of 1989. The Second Appeal was also dismissed. Thus the Judgment and decree of the Trial Court were confirmed. Thereafter Execution Case No. 2 of 2002 was initiated. In course of ex...
Anatha Kishore Panda and ors. Vs. Orissa State Handloom Development Co ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Dec-02-2008
Reported in: 107(2009)CLT59
A.S. Naidu, J.1. The facts and points of law in all these Writ Petitions being one and same, with consent of Learned Counsel for the parties the same were heard together.2. The Petitioner in all these Writ Petitions are the erstwhile employees of the Orissa State Handloom Development Corporation Ltd. which, if is stated, is a Government Orissa Undertaking. They were employed in the aforesaid Corporation in different posts. The Corporation at the initial stage functioned with flying colours, but by efflux of time ended in red. Ultimately in the year 1987 a decision was taken to close it down due to bad financial condition. The said decision to close down was assailed before this Court in OJC No. 14611 of 1997. This Court by an interim order passed on 18-12-1997 directed that before any final decision was taken regarding closure of the Corporation leave of this Court would be obtained. While matter stood thus, the Board of Directors of the Corporation in its 64th Meeting held on 29th Sep...
Kabi Alias Akshaya Kumar Mohanty Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Dec-02-2008
Reported in: 2009CriLJ1207
B.P. Ray, J.1. Both the appeals having arisen from out of the judgment and order dated 23-7-1990 passed by learned 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Cuttack in S.T. Case No. 46 of 1990, they were heard analogously and disposed of by this common judgment.2. The appellant stood trial for the offence Under Sections 302 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code (in short, 'IPC') for committing murder of one Sarat Chandra Bhoi and causing disappearance of evidence.3. The trial Court while acquitting the accused-appellant of the charge Under Section 302, IPC convicted him Under Section 304(II) and Section 201, IPC and sentenced him to undergo R.I. for five years and two years respectively. The appellant assailing his conviction Under Section 304(II) and Section 201, IPC has preferred the present Criminal Appeal. The State impugning the order of acquittal of the charge Under Section 302, IPC has filed the Govt. Appeal.4. The prosecution case in brief is that ion 25-5-1989 night at about 9 p.m. the accuse...
Sree Dadhibaman Jew Thakur and ors. Vs. Pranabandhu Sahu, After Him Ra ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Dec-02-2008
Reported in: 107(2009)CLT25
A.S. Naidu, J.1. The unsuccessful Plaintiffs are the Appellants herein. They had filed Title Suit No. 41 of 1984/20 of 1989 in the Court of the Addl. Munsif, Bhadrak inter alia praying for declaration that the M.S. record-of-rights in respect of the suit land was wrong and further declaration that the registered sale deeds executed in favour of contesting Defendants 1 and 2 and Banchhanidhi Behera was void; that the contesting Defendants had no manner of right, title, interest or possession over the suit land, as well as, for permanent injunction restraining them from coming upon the suit land besides other ancillary reliefs.2. Bereft of unnecessary details, the Plaintiffs' case in brief is that the suit land appertaining to C.S. Khata No. 620, Plot No. 2515 measuring Ac.0.34 dec. originally belonged to the ancestors of the Plaintiffs and the pro forma Defendants. They had installed Plaintiff No. 1 Deity on the suit land and created a private Debottar by endowing the suit land along wi...
Divisional Manager, Oriental Insurance Co. Vs. Jogendra Nahak and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Dec-02-2008
Reported in: 107(2009)CLT22
A.S. Naidu, J.1. The Judgment dated 7th May, 1999 passed by the Member, 2nd MACT (SD), Berhampur in MAC No. 489 of 1997 (87 of 1997) is assailed in this appeal filed by the Oriental Insurance Company under Section 173(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act.2. Respondent No. 1 -Jogendra Nahak was the claimant before the Tribunal in the aforesaid MAC. The scenario of facts reveals that on 14th September, 1996, while Respondent No. 1 along with two others who were also labourers was travelling in a mini-truck bearing registration number OR-07-A-7223 as labourers due to rash and negligent driving, the said vehicle met with an accident and capcised. Consequently, all the three labourers sustained grievous injuries. They were removed to a hospital where one of them expired and the life of the two others could be saved. Three claim cases (MACs) were filed under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act claiming compensation including the MAC No. 489 of 1997 (87 of 1997) filed by Respondent No. 1. All the s...
Mahavir Ice and Cold Storage (P) Ltd. Vs. Small Industries Development ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Dec-02-2008
Reported in: 107(2009)CLT51
B.S. Chauhan, C.J.1. This Writ Petition has been filed seeking refund of Rs. 9.69 lakhs along with interest alleged to have been illegally collected from the Petitioner by force by the Opposite Party No. 1 - Bank.2. The facts and circumstances giving rise to the case are that Petitioner had taken loan from the Opposite Party-bank to the tune of Rs. 64 lakhs. For that purpose an agreement dated 23rd December, 1995 was executed between the parties providing for a schedule of repayment, according to which the loan was repayable in 23 quarterly installments (22 installments of Rs. 2.79 each and last instalment of Rs. 2.62 lakhs) commencing at the end of 18th months from the date of disbursement of loan. Repayment dates were fixed on 1st day of March, June, September and December respectively. The agreement also contained the provisions for premature repayment, which reads as under:Premature Repayment of SIDBI Loan :The borrower shall not prepay the outstanding principal amount of loan in f...
Prasant Kumar Khuntia Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Dec-02-2008
Reported in: AIR2009Ori71; 107(2009)CLT47
B.S. Chauhan, C.J.1. This Writ Petition has been filed for issuing direction to the Opposite Parties to make payment of advocate fees along with 18% interest per annum.2. The facts and circumstances giving rise to the case are that Petitioner who was Addl. Standing Counsel for the Central Government had appeared in the Court of Civil Judge (Senior Division), Cuttack in a Rule of Court proceeding under Arbitration Act wherein the award of Rs. 40 lakhs passed against the Opposite Parties was set aside on his persuasion. The Petitioner/Learned advocate vide letter dated 23.6.1999 sent a bill of Rs. 4,40,350/- as Counsel fees, but the said demand was not acceded to by the Opposite Parties. In spite of several request, as no heed has been paid, he filed this Writ Petition.3. Dr. A.K. Rath, Learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner has submitted that Petitioner is entitled for the aforesaid amount of fee/ad valorem as the award given by the Arbitrator has been set aside by the Civil Court...
Union of India (Uoi) and anr. Vs. Shri Shyam Sundar Mohanty
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Dec-02-2008
Reported in: 107(2009)CLT163
Indrajit Mahanty, J.1. The Union of India, Petitioner in this writ application seek to challenge the Order Dated 8.1.2001 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Cuttack Bench, Cuttack in O.A. No. 227 of 1998, whereby, the Tribunal has been pleased to allow the Original Application filed by the Opposite Party by quashing the order of punishment imposed on the Opposite Party by Order Dated 20.2.1998 directing withholding of 15% of Opposite Party's pension for a period of two years pursuant to a disciplinary proceeding.2. Sri P.N. Mohapatra, Learned Counsel appearing for the Union of India, inter alia, submitted that since the Opposite Party was found to have violated the order of the General Manager, Telecom (Planning), Orissa Circle, Bhubaneswar and had sold unserviceable telcom store material to a contractor without inviting sealed tenders or holding public auction, the Tribunal ought not to have quashed the order of punishment directing withholding 15% of pension for a period ...
Smt. Hasina Begum @ Khatoon Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Dec-02-2008
Reported in: 107(2009)CLT208; 2009(1)OLR819
A.S. Naidu, J.1. The dispute in this Writ Petition is with regard to entitlement of the Petitioner to receive family pension. The Petitioner is a widow .Her husband late Syed Musraf Ali was working as a Sepoy in 120 Infantry Battalion (Territorial Army) from 21st June, 1956 till 20th June, 1971. He was assigned No. 10256910. After serving the Army for fifteen years he was disengaged. Thereafter he approached the authorities for grant of pension, but no steps were taken by the latter. His family passed their days through stringent financial difficulties. Unfortunately due to lack of food and medical care he died on 19th May, 1975 leaving behind the Petitioner as his widow and five minor children. Thereafter the Petitioner once again approached the authorities for grant of pension of her deceased husband and family pension to her. All her requests having been in vain, she had earlier approached this Court in W.P.(C) No. 4043 of 2007. The said Writ Petition was disposed of on 23rd July, 2...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »