Orissa Court January 2009 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.
Bebirani Baral Vs. Sankhalata Sahoo and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-22-2009
Reported in: 107(2009)CLT669
M.M. Das, J.1. The Petitioner is the returned candidate as Sarpanch of Anyashipur Grama Panchayat. The Sarpanch of the Constituency is the reserved Constituency for OBC/SEBC lady candidate. The Opp. Party No. 1 instituted an election dispute before the Learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Jajpur being Election Petition No. 5 of 2007 under Section 31 of the Orissa Grama Panchayat Act, 1964 (for short, 'the Act').The Opp. Party No. 1 in the election petition alleged that as per notification of the State Government, the said post of Sarpanch is reserved for OBC/SEBC lady candidate and the present Petitioner is the daughter of one Amulya Singh, whose caste is 'Kayasta' and after her marriage with one Biswajit Baral, who belongs to SEBC, she cannot take the benefit of her marriage to claim that she also belongs to OBC/SEBC. The Petitioner has filed her objection/written statement to the election petition stating, inter alia, that the Record of Rights standing in the name of her father doe...
Radhashyam Panigrahi Vs. Registrar (Admn.), Orissa High Court and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-22-2009
Reported in: 107(2009)CLT673
B.S. Chauhan, C.J.1. This Writ Petition has been filed for quashing the Order Dated 4.10.2004 (Annex.-8) by which the Petitioner has been reverted from the post of Junior Clerk to the post of Daftari (Class IV).2. The facts and circumstances giving rise to this case are that the Petitioner was appointed in a regular cadre as Daftari (Class-IV) in district judgeship of Kandhamal-Boudh in-December, 1981. The District Judge, Kandhamal-Boudh by letter dated 1.6.2002 asked the other Judicial Officers to submit list of Class IV employees who were eligible for promotion to Class III cadre in terms of resolution issued by P & S Department No. 7427/GEN. dated 6.4.1966 (hereinafter called 'the Resolution dated 6.4.1966') which provided 121/2 % reservation for Class IV employees to the vacancies in Class III. In response to the same, the Judicial Officers submitted a list of eligible candidates and in all candidature of 11 candidates was considered. Seven vacancies were filled up offering appoint...
Murali Rana Vs. Jasoda Rana and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-21-2009
Reported in: (2009)107CALLT320(NULL)
A.S. Naidu, J.1. The Judgment and decree dated 14.3.1989 passed in Title Appeal No. 8 of 1988 by the then Subordinate Judge, Boudh confirming the Judgment and decree dated 22.2.1988 passed by the then Learned Munsif, Boudh in Title Suit No. 2 of 1987 is assailed in this Second Appeal by Defendant No. 1.2. The facts of the case had been elaborately described in the Judgments passed by both the Courts. Therefore, this Court refrains from reiterating the same, but then refers to only those facts, which are necessary for proper appreciation of the inter se disputes.The Plaintiff is the daughter of one Tirtha. After the death of Tirtha, her mother, Laxmi re-married one Arta, cousin brother of Tirtha. Out of the said wedlock Defendants 1 and 2 were born. According to the Plaintiff, the suit properties exclusively belonged to Tirtha, her father and had been recorded in the name of the Plaintiff in Mutation Case No. 322 of 1979. It is further averred that the Defendants also filed a Mutation c...
Panchanan Purohit Vs. Md. Nurol Abser, Suply Supervisor
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-21-2009
Reported in: 2009(I)OLR684
Pradip Mohanty, J.1. This criminal appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 22.08.1990 passed by the learned Judge, Special Court, Sambalpur in T.R. No. 2 of 1989 convicting the appellant under Section 7(1)(a)(ii) of the Essential Commodities Act and sentencing him to undergo imprisonment till the rising of the Court and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/-, in default to undergo S.I. for one month.2. The case of the prosecution is that on 7.10.1988, the complainant (P.W.1). Supply Supervisor, Rairakhol inspected the business premises of the appellant, who was a licensed control dealer at the relevant time. He verified the daily sale register and the stock register. He also verified the stock physically, which did not tally with the stock shown in the register inasmuch as there was excess of 21 Kgs. of sugar and shortage of 22.82 quintals of rice. The complainant, P.W.1 seized the stock alongwith the books of accounts and kept the stock of rice and sugar in the zima of one Niranja...
Abdul Taher Khan and ors. Vs. Fatima Bibi and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-20-2009
Reported in: 107(2009)CLT582
Sanju Panda, J.1. Since common questions are involved in both the Writ Petitions, they were heard together and are being disposed of by this common Judgment.2. Both the Writ Petitions arise out of Title Suit No. 130 of 1980-I filed by present Opposite Parties 1 to 3 in the Court of Learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Bhadrak for partition claiming 3/8th share. For better appreciation, the genealogy of both the parties is given below:GENEALOGYSk. Manohar AliSk. Asgar AliJaheda @ Jabeda Bibi (wife) (D.3) Sk. Akbar Ali (D.1) : Sk. Umar Ali (D.2): Fatema Bibi (Plff. 1) : Sayera Banu (Plff.2) : Ayesha Sultana (Plff.3)From the above genealogy, it appears that Sk. Manohar Ali had one son, namely, Sk. Asgar Ali who died leaving behind his widow Jaheda @ Jabeda Bibi, Defendant No. 3- present Opposite Party No. 6 and two sons, namely, Sk.Akbar and Sk. Umar- Defendants 1 and 2 who are present Opposite Parties 4 and 5 in W.P.(C) No. 11179 of 2004 and three daughters who are the Plaintiffs. As p...
Larsen and Toubro Ltd. Vs. State Bank of India and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-19-2009
Reported in: (2009)107CALLT327(NULL)
A.S. Naidu, J.1. The dispute in this Civil Revision relates to invocation of the bank guarantee furnished by the Petitioner to Opposite Party No. 2- National High Way Authority of India Ltd.2. In response to an advertisement issued, Petitioner submitted his offer for execution of work of widening of 4-6 laning including strengthening the existing 2-lane carriageway of N.H.-60 from Km.0.000 to Km 53.410 i.e., between Balasore to Laxmannath. After opening of the bids and scrutiny thereof, the offer of the Petitioner was accepted and the work was awarded to it after execution of an agreement on 23.3.2001. The total cost of the work was Rs. 257,93,13,243/-. In course of execution of the work, it appears certain dissention cropped up and a dispute was raised by the Petitioner. In consonance with the terms of the agreement, the dispute was referred to the Dispute Review Board. It is averred that in the interest of timely completion of the project, the parties decided, as a matter of policy, ...
Laxmidhar Naik and ors. Vs. Sridhar Naik and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-19-2009
Reported in: AIR2009Ori122; (2009)107CALLT356(NULL)
A.S. Naidu, J.1. The Judgment and decree dated 25.2.1987 passed by the Learned Subordinate Judge, Karanjia in Title Appeal No. 4 of 1986 confirming the Judgment and decree dated 23.12.1985 passed by the Learned Munsif Karanjia inTitle Suit No. 13 of 1983 are assailed in the Second Appeal filed by the Defendants of the said suit.2. Bereft of unnecessary details, the short facts which are necessary for effectual adjudication of the suit are as follows:The Respondents as Plaintiffs, filed Title Suit No. 13 of 1983 for declaration of title, recovery of possession and permanent injunction with other consequential reliefs. The disputed lands appertaining to Khata No. 4 of Khadipal mouza in the district of Mayurbhanj. Defendant Nos. 6 and 7 inherited the said property from their mother Krushna Dehury. On 30.9.1974 Defendants 6 and 7 sold the suit lands by a registered sale deed to the Plaintiff for a consideration of Rs. 500/- and delivered possession thereof. In the year 1975 the Plaintiff r...
Steel Authority of India Ltd. Vs. State of Orissa and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-19-2009
Reported in: AIR2009Ori124; 107(2009)CLT430
I. Mahanty, J.1. The Petitioner namely, Steel Authority of India Limited (Raw Material Division)(hereinafter described as 'SAIL(RMD)' filed the writ applications, inter alia, seeking to challenge the Orissa Act 3 of 1994 by which amendment was inserted in the Orissa Irrigation Act, 1959 and Orissa Irrigation (Amendment) Rules, 1994 and further praying to declare the same to be invalid and unconstitutional on the ground of repugnancy and in competency of the State Legislature and as a colourable piece of legislation and/or declare the schedule of rates prescribed under the Rule 23-A to be arbitrary, irrational and confiscatory and with a further prayer to seek refund of Rs. 44,092 which was illegally collected from the Petitioner.2. When the matter came up for hearing on 6.1.2009, the following order was passed:The Writ Petition has been filed in 1996 and since then the matter is pending in this Court. However, we have gone through the Writ Petition. It does not disclose anywhere, that ...
Bhushan Power and Steel Ltd. Vs. State of Orissa and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-19-2009
Reported in: 107(2009)CLT677
B.S. Chauhan, C.J.1. This Writ Petition has been filed challenging the validity of assessment Order Dated 8.7.2008 passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax, Sambalpur Range, Sambalpur (hereinafter referred to as 'the assessing officer') under Section 43 of the Orissa Value Added Tax Act, 2004 (hereinafter referred to as 'the OVAT Act') on various grounds including the jurisdiction of the assessing officer to levy tax under Section 12 of the OVAT Act on the raw materials purchased from outside the State of Orissa.2. Shorn of unnecessary details, the facts giving rise to the present Writ Petition are that the Petitioner is a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 having its registered office at 4th Floor, Tolstoy House, Tolstoy Marg, Connaught Place, New Delhi-110001, and plants at Chandigarh, Punjab and Kolkata and branches all over India. Petitioner has set up an integrated steel plant at village Thelkoloi, Rengali in the district of Sambalpur, Orissa and is engage...
Prafulla Kumar Mohanty Vs. National Insurance Co. Ltd. and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jan-19-2009
Reported in: 107(2009)CLT772
A.S. Naidu, J.1. After being unsuccessful before the Supreme Court in Special Leave Petition No. 23158 of 2004, the Petitioner has once again approached this Court by filing a review petition under Order 47, Rule 1 read with Section 114 of the Code of Civil Procedure, inter alia, praying to review the Judgment dated 24th May, 2004 passed by the Division Bench of this Court in Letters Patent Appeal No. 41 of 2002. The said petition has been registered as RVWPET No. 71 of 2004. The present Misc. Case has been filed under Section 5 read with Section 14 of the Limitation Act praying to condone the delay in filing the review petition. According to the Stamp Reporter, there is a delay of 150 days. In the Misc. Case, it is averred that the Judgment dated 24.6.2004 passed in L.P.A. No. 4l of 2002 was challenged before the Supreme Court in Special Leave Petition No. 23I58 of 2004 and after dismissal of the Special Leave Petition, the review petition has been filed and as such, the delay should ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »