Orissa Court September 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.
Zahid Latiff Vs. Smt. Pravat Nalini Mohapatra
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-16-2008
Reported in: 2008(II)OLR995
ORDERPradip Mohanty, J.1. Heard Mr. Udgata, learned Counsel for the petitioner, and Mr. Dash, learnec Counsel for the opposite party.2. This revision is directed against the order dated 8.11.2007 passed by the learned S.D.J.M., Cuttack in I.C.C. Case No. 316 of 2002 rejecting the petition filed by the petitioner for dismissal of the complaint.3. At the outset, Mr. Udgata, learned Counsel for the petitioner, submits that during pendency of this criminal revision the parties have settled their dispute amicably out of the Court and on account of that the complainant-opposite party is no more interested to prosecute the complaint case.4. Mr. Dash, learned Counsel for the opposite party also admits the above fact and states that the matter has been settled outside the Court and the opposite party has already received Rs. 16,000/- in shape of a bank draft and, therefore, she is no more interested to prosecute the complaint case.5. A joint affidavit has been filed today sworn to by the petiti...
Bata India Ltd. Vs. Amiya Sankar Patra
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-15-2008
Reported in: 106(2008)CLT881; 2008(II)OLR794
B.S. Chauhan, C.J.1. This writ appeal has been filed against the judgment and order of the learned Single Judge dated 7.8.2008 passed in W.P.(C) No. 6322 of 2008 by which the writ petition of the appellant has been partly allowed against the order of the trial Court dated 5.4.2008. By the said order the trial Court while considering the application under Order 9, Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure (hereinafter called 'CPC') without deciding the same directed the appellant to deposit the entire decretal amount within a month and directed to list the applications for interim relief, under Order 9, Rule 13, CPC and under Section 47, CPC filed by the appellant thereafter.2. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied the appellant preferred W.P.(C) No. 6322 of 2008 which has been disposed of by the learned Single Judge reducing the amount to 50 per cent as directed by the trial Court. Hence this appeal.3. We have heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused the record.4. The question which a...
Smt. Meenakshi Panda Vs. Uco. Bank and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-15-2008
Reported in: 107(2009)CLT138; (2009)IILLJ275Ori; 2008(II)OLR934
B.P. Das, J.1. The brief facts leading to this writ application as delineated therein tends to reveal the following.The petitioner has been working as an employee under opposite party No. 1-United Commercial Bank ('Bank' hereinafter) since 26th September, 1977, her first place of posting being in Bhubaneswar Branch of the Bank. In 2004 when she was continuing as an Officer in Scale-III in Suryanagar Branch of the Bank at Bhubaneswar, she was selected for being posted in an Overseas Center of the Bank, i.e. at Singapore on the terms and conditions enumerated in the communication dated 21.5.2004 vide Annexure-1. In terms of Annexure-1, the petitioner executed the necessary agreement with the Bank vide Annexure-2 and joined as Chief Manager (Trade Finance) at Singapore Main Branch. On September 6, 2007 due to certain personal problems she tendered her resignation from Bank's service by the letter in Annexure-3.2. The Bank received and acknowledged the same by its letter in Annexure-4. On ...
Bhajaman Padhan Vs. Parsuram Dehury and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-11-2008
Reported in: 2008(II)OLR784
ORDERM.M. Das, J.1. Heard Mr. Dash, learned Counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Pattnaik learned Counsel for the opp.party No. 1 and the learned Counsel for the State.2. As Mr. Pattnaik has produced certified copies of the various orders passed by the Election Tribunal, I do not find it necessary to call for the lower Court records for verification of the same.3. The writ petitioner in this writ petition has called in question the judgment dated 25.7.2008 passed by the learned District Judge, Dhenkanal in F.A.O. No. 15 of 2007 confirming the judgment dated 21.6.2007 passed in Election Misc. Case No. 13 of 2007 by the learned Civil Judge, (Junior Division), Dhenkanal declaring the election of the petitioner as Sarpanch of Govindprasad Grama Panchayat as null and void and further declaring the opp.party No. 1 as Sarpanch.4. Bereft of unnecessary details, relevant facts for the purpose of disposal of the writ petition are as follows:The petitioner was the returned candidate as Sarpanch of the...
Nayak Variety Store Vs. Commissioner of Sales Tax
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-11-2008
Reported in: (2008)18VST500(Orissa)
B.S. Chauhan, C.J.1. In this writ petition the petitioner challenges the notice dated July 16, 2008 issued under Sub-rule (2) of Rule 44 of the Orissa Value Added Tax Rules, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as, 'the OVAT Rules') under annexure 1 for the purpose of conducting tax audit for the period from April 1, 2005 till the date of audit visit on the ground that the audit assessments for the period April 1, 2005 to March 31, 2006 and April 1, 2006 to October 31, 2006 were already completed earlier under Section 42 of the Orissa Value Added Tax Act, 2004 (hereinafter called as 'the OVAT Act') vide assessment orders dated December 2, 2006 (annexure 3 series). Hence, the second notice issued under annexure 1 is not sustainable in the eyes of law.2. The factual matrix of the case, eliminating unnecessary details, is as follows:The petitioner is a retailer of stationery and allied goods and runs his business in Municipal Market Complex, Talcher. He is registered under the OVAT Act having TI...
B.P. Enterprises Vs. State of Orissa and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-11-2008
Reported in: (2008)18VST405(Orissa)
B.S. Chauhan, C.J.1. This writ petition has been filed challenging the order of assessment dated July 3, 2008 passed by the assessing authority (Sales Tax Officer, Cuttack-II Circle, Cuttack) under the provisions of the Orissa Value Added Tax Act, 2004 (hereinafter called 'the OVAT Act') and Orissa Value Added Tax Rules, 2005 (hereinafter called 'the Rules, 2005')2. The facts and circumstances giving rise to the case are that the petitioner is a registered dealer under the provisions of the OVAT Act and has also been allotted a TIN number. It carries on business of manufacturing of aluminium utensils for sale. It submitted the return before the Sales Tax Officer, Cuttack-II Circle, Cuttack (hereinafter referred to as 'the assessing authority') as per the provisions under Section 33 of the OVAT Act read with proviso to Rule 34(8) of the Rules, 2005 for the tax period April 1, 2005 to November 30, 2006. The petitioner's business has been audited under the OVAT Act on November 22, 2006 an...
Biranjan Panda and anr. Vs. Bank of India and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-11-2008
Reported in: AIR2009Ori6
B.S. Chauhan, C.J.1. This writ petition has been filed challenging the order dated 8-4-2008 by which the adjournment sought by the petitioners before the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Cuttack (herein after called the Tribunal') has been refused, and as the counsel who appeared for advancing the petitioners' application for adjournment refused to argue the case on merit, the Original Application has been dismissed for default.2. The facts and circumstances giving rise to this case are that both the petitioners had incurred a loan to the tune of Rs. 10 lakhs each from the opposite parties - bank by mortgaging their immovable properties with the bank. As the instalments of the loan amount had not been paid by both the petitioners, the bank initiated proceedings under Section 13(2) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of the Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'). After completing the proceedings the bank advertised sale notice...
Jami Sivasai Vs. Official Liquidator, Orissa High Court and 2 ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-10-2008
Reported in: 106(2008)CLT639
B.S. Chauhan, C.J.1. This Company Appeal has been filed against thy Judgment and order of the Learned Company Judge dated 28.8.2008 passed in COPET No. 16 of 2002 by which the sale and delivery of possession of properties of M/s. Utkal Oils Limited (company on liquidation) have been directed in favour of the Respondent No. 2 - Ws. IVIittal Infra Projects Pvt. Ltd. and prayer for extension of time to deposit of amount offered by the present Appellant and Smt. J. Nirmala-Respondent No. 3 was refused.2. The facts and circumstances giving rise to the case are that M/s. Utkal Oils Limited a company failed to repay the debts of its creditors and therefore the liquidation process started. The winding up order was passed and thereafter the Learned Company Judge directed to put the properties of the said company into auction. Accordingly the Official Liquidator issued the sale notice in the daily news papers. The approved registered valuer assessed the valuation of the properties of the said co...
State Election Commission Vs. State of Orissa and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-10-2008
Reported in: 106(2008)CLT805
I.M. Quddusi, J.1. Since similar questions are involved in both the Writ Petitions, they were heard together and are disposed of by this common Judgment.2. The State Election Commission, Orissa has approached this Court by filing these two Writ Petitions with the allegation that the Election commission is not receiving cooperation of the State Government as well as Municipal Corporation in discharging its constitutional obligation of holding the election to the Municipal Corporations of Bhubaneswar and Cuttack (W.P.(C) No. 12356 of 2008 for Bhubaneswar Municipal Corporation & W.P.(C) No. 12453 of 2008 for Cuttack Municipal Corporation) within the time mandated in the Constitution and, therefore, the Commission has sought the relief for issuing a writ in the nature of Mandamus directing the State Government and the Cuttack Municipal Corporation & Bhubaneswar Municipal Corporation to provide all necessary cooperation and assistance to the State Election Commission, Orissa to enable it to...
Menaka Mohanty Vs. State of Orissa and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Sep-10-2008
Reported in: 2009CriLJ1414
ORDERB.K. Patel, J.1. The petitioner, who was the informant P.W. 8 in S.T. Case No. 12/1/9/311 of 96/95/94 has challenged in this revision the legality of judgment and order passed therein by the learned Assistant Sessions Judge-Cum-Chief Judicial Magistrate, Puri acquitting the opposite party Nos. 2 and 3 accused persons of the charges for commission of offences under Sections 395 of the Indian Penal Code (in short the 'I.P.C.') and Section 9(b) of the Indian Explosive Act (in short the 'I.E. Act'). Allegation in the case relates to dacoity in the house of P. W. 8 in the night intervening 21/22-01-1994.2. Prosecution case is that when P. W. 8 with her husband P. W. 9 and their baby son were sleeping inside a room, opposite party Nos. 2 and 3 accused persons along with some others entered into their house by forcibly opening the chain of the door by means of knife and three culprits including opposite party accused Gangadhar entered inside the room. The room was lighted by a kerosene l...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »