Court : Orissa
Reported in : AIR2008Ori133; 106(2008)CLT98; 2008(4)KLT276
Sanju Panda, J.1. This First Appeal is directed against the Judgment and decree dated 11.5.2001 and 3.7.2001 respectively passed by the Learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Baripada in Title Suit No. 189 of 1994.2. The facts of the case are as follows:Respondent No. 1 as Plaintiff filed the suit for partition of the properties as per Schedules-B to E of the plaint and for a decree for future rent in respect of rent of the rent of the building situated ever the suit land as described in Schedules-B & E of the plaint. The case of the Plaintiff was that Plaintiff and defendant No. 1 are brothers, defendant Nos. 4 and 5 are their sisters, defendant Nos. 2 and 3 are the sons of defendant No. 1. Krushna, the father of the Plaintiff and defendant Nos. 1, 4 and 5 died in the year 1991 while living jointly with his sons. There has been no partition of the suit properties by metes and bounds. The Plaintiff retired from his service as Senior Deputy Superintendent of Police in the year 1990. The...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : 105(2008)CLT697
M.M. Das, J.1. In this application under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the Petitioner has called in question the Order Dated 16.10.2004 passed by the Director, Consolidation, Cuttack-Opposite Party No. 1 in R.P. Case No. 2494 of 2004, annexed to the writ application as Annexure 4.2. To appreciate the contentions raised by the Learned Counsel for the respective parties, it is necessary to refer to the facts of the case in brief, which are as follows:Revision Case No. 333 of 1993 was filed by the Writ Petitioner before the Commissioner, Consolidation under Section 37(1) of the Orissa Consolidation of Holdings and Prevention of Fragmentation of Land Act, 1972 (herein after referred to as 'the Act') praying for correction of the map prepared under the Consolidation Scheme in respect of Sabik Plot Nos. 346 constituting an area of Ac. 0.03 dec. and 347 constituting an area of Ac. 0.04 decs, under Sabik Khata No. 170 corresponding to Chaka Plot No 498 with an area of Ac. ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : 2008(II)OLR121
B.K. Patel, J.1. The appellant having been convicted for. commission of offence of murder under Section 302 I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo R.I. for life by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Rairangpur in S.T. Case No. 12/102 of 1997-96 has preferred this appeal.2. Prosecution case in nut shell is that on 19.2.1996 at about 5.00 P.M., the appellant committed murder of the deceased Jatia Maharana by means of an arrow (M.O. IV) shot from his bow. It is alleged that one year prior to the occurrence when the appellant kept P.W.5's daughter in his house, P.W.5 and deceased brought her back upon which the appellant had threatened the deceased and P.W. 5's family members. Having been informed regarding the detection of the dead body of the deceased, the informant P.W. 1 who was discharging the duties of Gram Rakhi came to the spot and found that the deceased had been killed by an arrow shot. In P.W. 1's verbal report, P.W. 15, A.S.I, of Police, Badampahad P.S. prepared the F.I.R. Ext.1 and re...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : 2008(II)OLR599
L. Mohapatra, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order of conviction and sentence passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Mayurbhanj, Baripada in S.T. Case No. 31 of 1995 convicting the appellant for commission of offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (in short 'I.P.C') and sentencing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life.2. The case of the prosecution is that on 26.10.94 the deceased was returning with Faka Majhinai (P.W.2), Fagala Murmu (P.W.4) and Fagala's wife from Bijatala market. On the way Fagala and his wife left the main road and resorted to a short cut route at Balarampur and the deceased along with Faka Majhinai proceeded to their respective villages on the main road. On the way at about 8 P.M. it is alleged that the appellant emerged from his hide out and dealt lathi blows to the deceased. Faka Majhiani (P.W.2) ran away out of fear and concealed herself in the 'BILO' for the entire night. Next day morning she went to her village Dalki a...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : 2008(II)OLR418
I. Mahanty, J.1. In the present writ application the petitioner has sought to challenge, an order dated 27.11.2004 passed by the learned Ad hoc Additional District Judge Fast Track Court No. IV, Bhubaneswar in CRP No. 3/6 of 2004, refusing to exercise revisional jurisdiction, as well as, the order dated 23.4.2005 passed by the learned Ad hoc Additional District Judge Fast Track Court No. IV, Bhubaneswar rejecting Review Application No. 1/2006.2. In terms of the impugned order under Annexure-2 dated 27.11.2004 a revision petition was directed against an order under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, awarding the pendente lite and litigation expenses in favour of the opposite parties passed by Civil Judge Sr. Division, Bhubaneswar.3. This petition was rejected with a finding that w.e.f. 1.7.2002 the District Court has no jurisdiction to entertain a revision petition under Section 115 of the C.P.C. This conclusion was reached on a finding that in view of the amendment to Section 115 of...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : 2008(I)OLR942
B.K. Patel, J.1. Both the Death Reference and the Jail Criminal Appeal arise out of the judgment and order passed by the learned Ad hoc Addl. Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Rourkela in Sessions Trial No. 143/38 of 2006 convicting the appellant for commission of offence under Section 302 I.P.C. and sentencing him to death and also to pay fine of Rs. 5000/-. No default sentence has been passed for non-payment of fine amount.2. Accusation in the case relates to commission of gruesome murder by the appellant of his wife Muni Mahanto and son Babu, who was aged about one year in the night of 12/13 January, 2006. P.W.1 is the deceased's brother whereas the informant, P.W.4 is the appellant's neighbour. Prosecution case is that the appellant was residing with his deceased wife and son as a tenant in the house belonging to P.W.9 at Bisra. There was frequent quarrel between the appellant and the deceased wife. The appellant was present in his house with the deceased persons and some sounds we...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : 2008(II)OLR504
Pradip Mohanty, J.1. This Appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 19.12.1997 passed by the Sessions Judge, Kalahandi-Nuapada at Bhawanipatna acquitting the respondent of the charge under Section 20(b)(1) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act in G.R. Case No. 315 of 1996.2. The case of the prosecution is that on 30.8.1996 Kumar Harizan and some other villagers had been to the Forest, locally known as Dabrighati, to collect firewood. After collecting fire wood, when they were returning home, at about 4.00 P.M. they found the accused-respondent and another man, who were passing through the said forest by holding a bag each. On being asked as to what articles they were carrying, the present respondent and the other man tried to flee away, but on being called, they came near. On interrogation of villagers, the present respondent admitted that he was carrying Ganja. The villagers recovered the ganja and took him and the other man along with the bags containing...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : 2008(I)OLR577
ORDERB.P. Ray, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Counsel for the State.2. This application under Section 482, Cr.P.C. has been filed with a prayer to quash the order dated 6.11.2007 passed by the learned J.M.F.C, Khariar in G.R. Case No. 136 of 2006 rejecting the petitioner's application under Section 205, Cr.P.C. for dispensing with his personal attendance and permit him to appear through his pleader. I am not inclined to interfere with the impugned order at this stage.3. However, I direct that in the event the petitioner surrenders before me J.M.F.C, Khariar on or before 20.3.2008 in the aforesaid G.R. Case and applies for bail he shall be released on bail on such terms and conditions as the learned Magistrate thinks fit. It is open to the petitioner to file an application under Section 317, Cr.P.C. showing cogent reasons for his absence. In that event, the learned Magistrate shall consider the application in its proper perspective and pass appropriate ord...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : (2008)106CALLT226(NULL)
Sanju Panda, J.1. This Civil Revision is directed against the impugned Judgment and decree dated 18.3.2006 and 30.3.2006 respectively passed by the Learned Addl. District Judge, Jajpur in Money Appeal No. 6 of 1996 dismissing the appeal on contest without cost.2. The brief facts of the case are as follows; Petitioner is the Defendant No. 2 in the suit for damage. Opposite Parties as the Plaintiffs filed the suit claiming damage of Rs. 960/- from the Defendants along with cost of the suit. Plaintiffs pleaded in the plaint that they purchased the disputed property from the Defendants on 5.6.1979 for a consideration of Rs. 1000/-. After purchase, they were possessing the property since 5.6.1979 by growing paddy. The land has been settled in the name of the Plaintiffs and they were paying rent for the suit land. While the matter stood thus, on 7.12.1990 the Defendants with the help of some labourers cut away and removed the crops raised by the Plaintiffs in the suit land. It is further sta...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : 2008(I)OLR559; (2008)15VST186(Orissa)
B.N. Mahapatra, J.1. Both the writ petitions have been filed by the petitioner-Indo Arya Central Transport Ltd. In W.P.(C) No. 13123 of 2004 challenge is made to the order dated 17.8.2004 under Annexure-1 passed by the Addl. Commissioner (Central Zone), Orissa, Cuttack (hereinafter called as 'revisional authority') in upholding the order dated 6.11.2002 (Annexure-8) passed by the Sales Tax Officer, I, West Circle, Cuttack (hereinafter referred to as the 'STO) by which direction has been given to the petitioner-company to pay the total sum of Rs. 90,152/- without passing any assessment order as contemplated under second proviso to Sub-section (5) of Section 16-D of the Orissa Sales Tax, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as the S.T.O. Act) and without allowing an opportunity to the petitioner to verify the connected records and to cross-examine the witnesses.In W.P.(C) No. 13124 of 2004, petitioner's grievance is that the revisional authority vide his order dated 17.8.2004 under Annexure-1 h...
Tag this Judgment!