Orissa Court May 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.
Kalia @ Susanta Kumar Tarei Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: May-19-2009
Reported in: 108(2009)CLT81
R.N. Biswal, J.1. Heard Learned Counsel for the Petitioner & Learned Addl. Standing Counsel for the State on the petition Under Section 439 of Cr.P.C.2. The Petitioner is said to have committed offence under Sections 302/34 of I.P.C. in G.R. Case No. 338 of 2008 pending before the court of the Learned J.M.F.C., Pattamundai on the allegation that he assaulted the deceased with a Silapua, causing his death. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that as found from the F.I.R. three other persons assaulted the deceased with crow bar sped etc. causing his death. The informant is the brother of the deceased himself. In his statement under Section 161 of Cr.P.C., he also stated that three other persons assaulted the deceased with crow bar and sped leading to his death. However, two of the witnesses one of whom did not know the Petitioner earlier stated that the Petitioner confessed before them to have murdered the deceased. Basing upon the statement of those witnesses charge sheet has bee...
Kedar Gouri Rice Mill Vs. State of Orissa and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: May-19-2009
Reported in: (2010)27VST387(Orissa)
ORDER1. Heard Mr. J. Sahu, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Dalai, learned Additional Standing Counsel for the Revenue.2. The petitioner, who is a registered dealer under the Orissa Value Added Tax Act, 2004 and has been granted a TIN number, challenged the order of assessment dated April 21, 2007 passed by the Sales Tax Officer, Bhanjanagar Circle, Bhanjanagar, Ward A, opposite party No. 2, under the Orissa Value Added Tax Act, 2004 vide annexure 2 on the following grounds:That the provisions of Section 2(4) of the OVAT Act defining the expression 'assessing authority' being relevant the same are reproduced below:Section 2. (4) 'assessing authority' means any officer appointed under Sub-section (2) of Section 3 who is authorized by the Commissioner to make assessment under this Act.The provisions of Rule 34(8) and Rule 34(12) of the OVAT Rules, 2005 being relevant the same are reproduced below:Rule 34. (8) The return under Sub-rule (1) shall be filed in the range and the ret...
Sri Mrutunjaya Chand Vs. Sri Asish Kumar Pratihari
Court: Orissa
Decided on: May-18-2009
Reported in: 108(2009)CLT82
I. Mahanty, J.1. In this revision petition under Section 401 read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal procedure, the Petitioner, herein Mrutunjaya Chand, has sought to challenge the Order Dated. 8.3.2007 passed by the Learned S.D.J.M., Bhubaneswar in I.C.C. Case No. 14 of 2006, whereby the Petitioners' prayer to stay the further proceeding and the trial of the case till disposal of the C.S. No. 470 of 2005 pending in the court of the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Puri was rejected.2. Learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner had filed C.S. No. 470 of 2005 seeking a declaration to the effect that he had no liabilities by the time the cheques were presented for clearance. Learned Counsel further submits that since the Civil Suit had already been initiated much prior to the present complaint case, complaint case should have been adjourned till Civil Suit was decided, wherein the liabilities of the Petitioner would be determined. He accordingly submits ...
Smt. Benga Khuntia and anr. Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: May-18-2009
Reported in: 108(2009)CLT29
Indrajit Mahanty, J.1. In the present criminal appeal, the Appellants namely, Smt. Benga Khuntia and her son Dharamananda Khuntia have sought to challenge an order of conviction and sentence dated 4.8.2004 passed by the Learned Adhoc Additional Sessions Judge (FTC No. 111), Cuttack in Sessions Trial Case No. 579 of 2003 convicting' the Appellants under Sections 498(A)/304(B)/54 I.P.C. and Section 4 of the Dowry A Prohibition Act and sentencing them to undergo R.I. for six months under Section 4 D.P. Act, R.I. for a period of three years under Section 498(A) I.P.C. and R.I. for a period of 7 years under Section 304(B) I.P.C. All the sentences were directed to run concurrently.2. The case of the prosecution was that on 2.1.2003 at about 8.00 P.M., one Lalit Kumar Rout (informant) had presented a written report before the O.I.C., Tangi P.S. alleging that on 31.12.2002, he had been informed by his brother-in-law (accused-Appellant No. 2) that his sister Lalita Rout @ Sila Khuntia had been ...
Prabhu Charan Das Vs. Bishnu Charan Das and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: May-18-2009
Reported in: 108(2009)CLT294
A.S. Naidu, J.1. The Order-Dated 8.8.2008 passed by the Learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Jagatsihghpur in C. M.A. No. 37 of 2008 arising out of C.S. No. 115 of 2007 is assailed in this Writ Petition. The present Petitioner is Defendant No. 1 in C.S. No. 115 of 2007. To appreciate the inter se pleadings, some of the facts of the case would be necessary to be stated.2. Admittedly, Late Laxmidhar Das was the original owner in respect of the suit schedule properties and some other properties. Laxmidhar had two sons, being Radheshyam Das and Baidyanath Das. Radheshyam had two sons, namely, Nrusingh Ch. Das and Swadhin Ku. Das. Bishnu, Manoranjan and Prabhu, are the sons of Baidyanath. For the sake of better understanding, the genealogy of the family is given hereinbelow:Late Laxmidhar DasLate Radheshyam Das Baidyanath Das (O.P.3)= Basanta Monjari Das(wife) | | || Bishnu(O.P.1)Prabhu Manoranjan(O.P.2)Nrusingha Ch. Das Swadhin Ku. Das3. It is submitted that Radheshyam Das during his lif...
Surendranath Kar Vs. Bhaba Dulal Bose
Court: Orissa
Decided on: May-18-2009
Reported in: 2009(II)OLR247
Pradip Mohanty, J.1. This Criminal Revision is directed against he order dated 28.06.2005 passed by the Ad hoc Addl. Sessions Judge, FTC No. 1, Cuttack in Criminal Appeal No. 72 of 2003 confirming the judgment dated 12.11.2003 passed by the learned J.M.F.C., Cuttack in I.C.C. Case No.113 of 2002/Trial No.503 of 2003.2. The case of the prosecution is that the accused-petitioner in course of his business transaction purchased flour, Maida, etc. from the complainant and issued three cheques for a total amount of Rs. 3,98,500/-. The complainant presented the said cheques for clearance with his banker, but the same were dishonoured due to insufficient fund in the account of the accused-petitioner. On being intimated regarding the dishonour of cheques, the. complainant sent demand notice to the accused-petitioner asking for payment. In spite of notice, the accused-petitioner failed to make any payment, for which the above noted complaint was filed.3. The plea of the accused-petitioner was co...
Jayadev Panda @ Tripathy Vs. State of Orissa and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: May-15-2009
Reported in: 108(2009)CLT359
A.S. Naidu, J.1. The Order Dated 22nd March, 2006 passed by the Joint Commissioner, Consolidation, Cuttack in Consolidation Revision No. 512 of 2004 (Annexure-5) is assailed in this Writ Petition.2. The said revision was filed by the present Petitioner invoking jurisdiction of the Commissioner under Section 37(1) of the Orissa Consolidation of Holdings & Prevention of Fragmentation of Land Act, 1972, hereinafter to be called as 'the Act', in short. The Petitioner claimed to record his name in respect of the suit land appertaining to Sabik Plot Nos. 313, 314, 315, 316 & 317 of Khata No. 287 of 1977 settlement of mouza Sabalkana, P.S. Mahanga. According to the Petitioner, he had purchased the said lands by registered deed No. 1223 dated 10th March, 1966 from one Upendra.3. The Commissioner after verification of the records & evidence both oral & documentary, came to the conclusion that the disputed land stood recorded jointly in the name of the Petitioner & two others, being Surenderanat...
Sri Budhanath Lenka Vs. Collector-cum-district Magistrate Ad ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: May-14-2009
Reported in: 2009(II)OLR359
ORDERM.M. Das, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Counsel for the State.2. In spite of valid service of notice, the opposite party No.5-Sarpanch has not entered appearance. The facts reveal that the petitioner was appointed as Secretary of Similli Gram Panchayat on 01.06.1984. On 29.10.2002 a resolution was passed by the Gram Panchayat to suspend him with effect from the said date and the petitioner was accordingly intimated that he is put under suspension. On receiving copy of the said resolution, the District Panchayat Officer, Puri placed one Debendra Kumar Swain, Secretary of Sonara G.P. in additional charge of Simili Gram Panchayat in place of the petitioner by his order dated 08.01.2002.3. Being aggrieved, the petitioner filed an appeal before the Sub-Collector-opposite party No. 3, being G.P. Appeal No. 16 of 2002.4. The Sub-Collector-opposite party passed an interim order staying the order passed by the District Panchayat Officer and accordingly direc...
L. Narayana Murty and anr. Vs. M. Venkata Ramana Rao and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: May-14-2009
Reported in: 108(2009)CLT377
A.S. Naidu, J.1. Defendant Nos. 1 & 2 in Title Suit No. 23 of 1988 of the Court of Learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Rayagada, have filed this revision assailing the Order Dated January 3, 2009 passed by the said Court rejecting the petition filed under Order 7, Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, in short, 'Code' & refusing to reject the suit as not maintainable.2. Opp. Party No. 1, as Plaintiff, had filed the aforesaid suit with a prayer for declaration that he has undivided & half interest in the suit land & the sale deeds executed in favour of the present Petitioners, who are Defendant Nos. 1 & 2 in the Court below by his father would not affect his right, title & interest over the suit property. After receiving notice & in the midst of hearing, Defendants 1 & filed a petition under Order 7, Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure with a prayer to reject the plaint on the ground that the same was hit by the principles of res judicata. According to the Defendants, the Plaint...
Surendra Kumar Agarwal Vs. State of Orissa and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: May-14-2009
Reported in: 2009(II)OLR407
S.C. Parija, J.1. The accused-petitioner has filed this writ petition praying for quashing of the FIR registered as Barkot PS. Case No. 66 of 2008 under Section 379 IPC and Section 21 of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 and the corresponding criminal proceeding in G.R. Case No. 326 of 2008, pending in the court of learned S.D.J.M., Deogarh.2. The case of the accused-petitioner is that for operating the Intermediate Storage Depot for storage and transportation of Iron Ores, the petitioner applied for a licence under the provisions of Orissa Minerals (Prevention of Theft, Smuggling and other Unlawful Activities) Rules 1990 (since repealed). Accordingly the petitioner was granted a licence in Form 'D' in the name of M/s. Sankar Transport, under the provisions of Rule 4 of the aforesaid 1990 Rules, for storage and transhipment of Iron Ores at Rajna in Barkot, in the district of Deogarh.3. While the petitioner was operating the Intermediate Storage Depot at Rajn...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »