Orissa Court April 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.
Gautam Kumar Das and Two ors. Vs. Saraj Kumar Sahu
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Apr-09-2008
Reported in: 2008(I)OLR958
R.N. Biswal, J.1. The petitioners assail the orders dated 15.9.2001 (Annexure-2) and 18.10.2003 (Annexure-3) passed by the S.D.J.M. Keonjhar in I.C.C. case No. 37 of 2001 wherein she took cognizance of the offence under Sub-sections 12 and 13 of Section 115 of the Orissa Co-operative Societies Act, 1962 (in short 'the Act') and refused to recall the same respectively.2. Opp.party was a member of Palasapanga LAMPCS, and was elected as the President of the said Society in the year 1996. The term of his office expired on 7.5.2001. During his term of office, petitioner No. 1 was the Chief Electoral Officer of the Co-operative Societies, Orissa, who authorized petitioner No. 2 to appoint Election Officers to conduct the elections of the members and presidents of the Committee of management of all the Co-operative Societies under Keonjhar district in due date. Accordingly, vide order No. 3 dated 31.1.2001, he appointed H.N. Mishra, Inspector of Co-operative Societies, office of ARCS, Keonjha...
Bhagabat Rout and anr. Vs. Sudarsan Rout and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Apr-09-2008
Reported in: (2008)106CALLT46(NULL)
Pradip Mohanty, J.1. This civil revision is directed against the Order Dated 06.11.1998 passed by the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Athagarh in T.S. No. 7 of 1996 overruling the objection raised by the Plaintiffs.2. Plaintiff-Petitioners filed T.S. No. 7 of 1996 in the Court of Civil Judge (Senior Division), Athagarh for declaring that Defendant No. 2 is not the adopted son of Defendant No. 1 and that the gift deeds executed by Defendant No. 1 is null and void with a further prayer to depute a Civil Court Commissioner to carve out the shares of the Plaintiffs over the suit lands.3. After closure of the Plaintiffs evidence when Defendant No. 1 was examined as D.W.7, the Counsel for the Defendants put him a question and in that context objection was raised by the Plaintiffs for not recording the answer to the said question put to D.W.7. The Learned Civil Judge overruled that objection raised by the Counsel for the Plaintiffs. Hence this revision.4. Mr. Das, Learned Counsel for the Plain...
Bharamarbar Das Vs. State of Orissa and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Apr-09-2008
Reported in: [2008(117)FLR1143]; (2008)IIILLJ385Ori; 2008(II)OLR274
Pradip Mohanty, J.1. This revision is directed against the judgment of the learned Second Addl. Sessions Judge, Puri in Criminal Appeal No. 1/75 of 2000-1995 setting aside the conviction and sentence passed by the learned J.M.F.C, Puri in 2 (C) C.C. No. 14 of 1994 against the present opposite party No. 2 under Section 29 of the Industrial Disputes Act.2. Brief facts of the case are that petitioner was serving as an employee in M/s. Nilachal Service Station, Grand Road, Puri, of which opposite party No. 2 is the owner and employer. Opposite Party No. 2 terminated the service of the petitioner. Thereafter, petitioner raised an industrial dispute under the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act. The dispute was conciliated by the Labour Officer but was subsequently referred to the Labour Court by the Government for adjudication as to whether the termination of the petitioner was legal and just. The Presiding Officer, Labour Court registered I.D. Case No. 16 of 1995 and disposed of the ...
Ukali Musmat Vs. Kishori Sahu
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Apr-09-2008
Reported in: AIR2008Ori138
A.K. Parichha, J.1. Defendant No. 1 is in appeal against the judgment and decree passed by the learned District Judge, Dhenkanal in Title Appeal No. 3 of 1981 confirming the judgment and decree of Subordinate Judge, Angul passed in Title Suit No. 1 of 1978-I.2. The present respondent as plaintiff filed the above noted suit pleading inter alia that the suit Schedule 'A1 property belonged to Mahi Sahu, who got it in the family partition. Mahi Sahu had two daughters; Surkita and Ukuli (D-1). Surkita died in 1959 leaving a minor son Kishori (plaintiff). Since Mahi and his wife Hema had no son and after the death of Surkita, Kishori was left uncared for, Mahi and Hema adopted Kishori as their son in the year 1966. Mahi died in 1969. Till his death he was in possession of the suit land. After his death, his wife Hema (D.2) and adopted son Kishori (plaintiff) possessed the suit land jointly. When the mother stood thus, defendant No. 1 in the year 1972 staked her claim over the suit land with ...
Rajesh Kumar JaIn Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Apr-09-2008
Reported in: 2008CriLJ4472
ORDERPradip Mohanty, J.1. This criminal revision is directed against the order dated 15-3-2007 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Bhawanipatna in S. C. No. 73/57 of 2006 permitting the prosecution to examine P.W. 3 under Section 154 of the Evidence Act after his cross-examination by the defence counsel.2. The petitioner is facing trial under Sections 302/304-B/498-A, IPC and Section 4 of the D. P. Act. After examination and cross-examination of P.W. 3, the P. P. filed a petition under Section 154 of the Evidence Act on 15-3-2007 with a prayer to re-examine the said witness. The trial Court after considering the said petition under Section 154 of the Evidence Act declared P.W. 3 hostile. Thereafter, he was cross-examined by the prosecution and also by the defence.3. Mr. Panda, learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petition under Section 154 of the Evidence Act, which was filed after cross-examination of P.W. 3, is not permissible, since the defence elicited some new ...
Krishna Chandra Mohanty Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Apr-08-2008
Reported in: 2008(I)OLR996
B.K. Patel, J.1. The petitioner's appeal having been dismissed by the learned Sessions Judge, Sundargarh, this revision has been preferred challenging the judgment and order passed by the learned S.D.J.M., Sundargarh convicting the petitioner under Section 47(a) of the Bihar and Orissa Excise Act (for short 'the Act') and sentencing him to undergo R.I. for six months and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/-, i.e., R.I. for one month.2. The prosecution was lodged against the petitioner on the allegation that on 5.10.1992 at about 6.15 P.M. S.I. of Excise P.W.3 along with his staff including Constable of Excise P.W.1 in presence of independent witnesses including P.W.2 searched the petitioner's house and recovered one plastic jerrycane containing 5 litres of C.S. liquor. P.W.3 tested the liquor by means of blue litmus paper and hydrometre and ascertained that the jerrycane contained C.S. liquor upon which seizure list Ext.1 was prepared.Petitioner took the plea of complete denial of the prosecutio...
Ram Nag Vs. State of Orissa and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Apr-08-2008
Reported in: (2008)106CALLT64(NULL)
S.C. Parija, J.1. The present Petitioner, Ram Nag along with others, had earlier filed a Writ Petition i.e. W.P.(C) No. 13048 of 2006 with the following prayer:In the circumstances stated above, it is therefore most humbly prayed that your Lordships may be graciously pleased to declare the land acquisition proceeding as null and void without the force of law and be pleased to quash the notification under Annexure-3 series due to violation of the provisions of said Act and to initiate fresh proceedings as per law;AndFurther be pleased to direct the State authorities (Opp.Parties 1 to 6) not to take any drastic and whimsical steps to deprive the Tribal Petitioners (representing four villages) from their property forcibly by using police force without following the due procedure of law i.e. the payment of proper compensation, proper re-settlement and re-habilitation according to policy decision of State Govt. under Annexure-4 series as all the Petitioners and others have a full support to...
Assam Transport Service and ors. Vs. State of Orissa and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Apr-08-2008
Reported in: (2008)14VST557(Orissa)
A.K. Ganguly, C.J.1. This writ petition has been filed by several petitioners of which petitioner No. 1 claims to be a citizen of India and is carrying on business under the name and style of Assam Transport Service as its own proprietor. The case of petitioner No. 1 is that, it executes orders for inter-State carriage of goods. Petitioner No. 2 is a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 and is engaged, inter alia, in the business of buying and selling of Purified Terephthalic Acid (PTA). Petitioner No. 3 is also a company incorporated under the Companies Act, and is a manufacturer of PTA in its unit at Haldia in West Bengal, and petitioner No. 4 is the company secretary and vice president of petitioner No. 3 and a citizen of India. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioners jointly as, according to them, there is a common cause of action and a common impugned order in this case.2. The case of the petitioners is that petitioner No. 3, which is a manufacturer of P...
Smt. Silu Ekka Vs. State of Orissa and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Apr-08-2008
Reported in: (2008)106CALLT21(NULL)
S.C. Parija, J.1. The Petitioner has filed this Writ Petition challenging the action of the Opposite Parties in threatening to evict her from the Government land and demolish her house by use of force though she has perfected her right, title and interest over the said land by way of adverse possession and the land in question is to be settled in her favour under Section 8-A of the Orissa Prevention of Land Encroachment Act, 1972 (for short 'the Act'). The Petitioner alleged that the Opposite Parties without adopting the procedure of law are trying to evict her and demolish her house in violation of the provisions of the Act and principles of natural justice. The Petitioner has accordingly prayed for a direction to the Opposite Parties to settle the said, land in her favour.2. The brief facts of the case is that Khata No. 814, Plot Nos. 1123/1, 1124/1 and 1723/1, measuring an area of AO. 19 decs. in village Brahmani Tarang in the district of Sundergarh is an Anabadi land which belongs ...
Santosh Nayak Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Apr-08-2008
Reported in: 2009CriLJ193; 2008(II)OLR25
ORDERB.K. Patel, J.1. These two revisions are directed against the order dated 14.3.2007 passed in exercise of power under Section 319 Cr.P.C. by the learned Ad hoc Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Jajpur in ST. Case No. 28/08/2006 by which the petitioners have been arrayed as accused persons and summoned to face trial under Section 302 I.P.C.2. Allegation in S.T. Case No. 28/08/2006 relates to commission of murder of deceased Prasanna Behera. On detection of the decomposed dead body of the deceased in an abandoned quarters meant for occupation of Junior Engineer of the Irrigation Office at Jenapur, an U.D. case was registered and enquired into. Subsequently, on the basis of the F.I.R. lodged by S.l. of Police, Dharmasala P.S. Case No. 159 of 2005 was registered against unknown accused persons. On completion of investigation, charge-sheet was submitted against the accused Bijaya Kumar Patra @ Atiri under Sections 341/342/ 325/302/201 I.P.C. By order dated 22.2.2006 passed i...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »