Orissa Court June 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.
Biswanath Panda Vs. Sarat Chandra Panda and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jun-26-2009
Reported in: 108(2009)CLT287
A.S. Naidu, J.1. Plaintiff of Title Suit No. 12 of 1977 of the Court of the then Subordinate Judge, Aska, is the Appellant in this Second Appeal. The suit was one for recovery of possession of the suit schedule lands and for recovery of mesne profit, both past and future, in respect of Ac.2,21 cents of lands more fully described in the plaint schedule.2. Bereft of unnecessary details, the short facts necessary for appreciating the inter se disputes are as follows:Biswanath Panda (Plaintiff) and Chakrapani Panda were two brothers. According to the plaint case, there was an oral partition between the two brothers in March, 1955. In the said partition, half of the joint family properties and cash of Rs.3,000 was allotted to the share of Biswanath' Panda, the Plaintiff, whereas the other half of the properties were allotted in favour of Chakrapani Panda, father of Defendants. In the said partition, Ac.4.00 dec. of lands besides a house was also allotted to the share of mother of Chakrapani...
Kumari Sumati Sundara Vs. the Special Land Acquisition Officer-cum-col ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jun-26-2009
Reported in: 108(2009)CLT380
Sanju Panda, J.1. This appeal is directed against the Judgment dated 20.12.2004 passed by the Learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Bhubaneswar in L.A. Misc. Case No. 282 of 2002 in a reference under Section 30 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act').2. Admittedly, Ac.0.370 dec. of land appertaining to Hal Plot No 107 under Khata No. 21 of village Jatni was acquired by the Government for construction of Khurda-Bolangir New B.G. Rail Link Project. Initially the said land belonged to one Fakir Charan Mohanty of village Kudiary P.S. Jatni. Thoreafter, it was transferred to one Halu Sundara who purchased the said land. Rabindra Sundara & Rajendra Sundara were the sons of Antaryami Sundara, the brother of Halu Sundara. Rabindra Sundara & Rejendra Sundara filed an application stating therein that the land was purchased out of joint family property. They being the sons of Antaryami, the brother of Halu Sundara, were entitled to get 50% share from tho compensa...
Orissa Forest Development Corporation Ltd., rep. thro' Its Managing Di ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jun-25-2009
Reported in: (2010)ILLJ359Ori
M.M. Das, J.1. The Management - Orissa Forest Development Corporation Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as 'the Management') is the petitioner in this writ petition and has called in question the Order dated March 18, 2006 vide Annexure-1 passed by the Labour Court, Sambalpur in Misc. Case No. 1/2005 filed by the Opp. Party No. I. The said application was filed under Section 33-C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short, 'the Act') claiming monetary benefits, which he alleged to be entitled to from the Management towards his salary, provident fund etc. from August, 2003, onwards as mentioned in the statement appended to the application under Section 33-C(2) of the Act, along with the enhanced arrear D.A. with effect from July 2000 to August, 2003.2. The facts in nut-shell are that the Opp. Party No. 1 while working as Field Assistant, Turumunda Sal seed Purchase Centre of Keonjhar (C-KL) Division of the Orissa Forest Development Corporation Ltd. along with 71 other employees was ...
Zerina Marines Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State of Orissa and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jun-23-2009
Reported in: 108(2009)CLT336
Sanju Panda, J.1. In this writ application, the Petitioner-company has challenged the inaction of the Opposite Parties with regard to payment of its legitimate dues.2. The facts as unfolded in the petition are as follows:The Petitioner is a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 situated at Bhubaneswar. In pursuance of a tender call notice, the Petitioner submitted its tender for excavation of R.B.C. including structure of Rengali Irrigation Project RD. 74.00 K.M to 79.00 K.M (Reach III). The work was allotted in favour of the Petitioner & a letter of intent was issued followed by the work order. The Petitioner entered into an agreement with the Executive Engineer, Sapua Badajoda Irrigation Division, Satmile, Dhenkanal for a value of Rs. 6,00,66,495.23. In the said agreement, the date of commencement of the work was 29.1.1999 & the date for completion of the work was 28.1.2000. The scope of the work was excavation of canal. For the said purpose, the Government was required ...
Janakilata Dei @ Sahu Vs. Premalata Naik
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jun-22-2009
Reported in: 108(2009)CLT345
A.S. Naidu, J.1. Opposite Party as Plaintiff had filed T.S No. 243 of 1981 in the Court of the Learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Cuttack for declaration of title & for injunction against the Petitioner, who was Defendant in the said suit. The suit was decreed ex-parte on 16.2.1985. Thereafter a petition for mutation was filed by Opposite Party for recording of her name in the Tahasil records. The prayer was allowed in Mutation Case No. 3925 of 1976 & necessary corrections were also made in the Record of Rights.2. Mr. Mukherjee, Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submitted that without serving any notice on the Petitioner, the Opposite Party obtained an ex-parte decree though the Petitioner was all along in possession of the lands. On 08.11.1995 for the first time the husband of Opposite Party tried to forcibly enter into the land & started cultivating operations. Protest being made, husband of Opposite Party disclosed that he had already obtained a decree from the Civil Court in f...
Kamalakanta Mohapatra and ors. Vs. Pratap Chandra Mohapatra and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jun-22-2009
Reported in: AIR2010Ori13; 108(2009)CLT367
A.S. Naidu, J.1. Aggrieved by the Judgment & decree passed by Learned District Judge, Balasore-Bhadrak in S.J. Appeal. No 99/1991, modifying the Judgment & decree passed by Learned Addl. Sub-ordinate Judge, Balasore in O.S. No. 36 of 1988-1/119 of 1984 to certain extent, but dismissing the appeal as well as the cross objection, the Plaintiff-Respondents have approached this Court invoking jurisdiction under Section 100 C.P.C.2. The appellants are the legal representatives of deceased Sudhamani, who, as the sole Plaintiff, filed O.S. No. 36 of 1988-1/119 of 1984 in the Court of the then Addl. Sub-ordinate Judge, Balasore. The said suit was one for partition. According to the plaint case the properties more fully described in suit schedule were part & parcel of her ancestral properties & she had a valid share therein. To appreciate the inter se disputes, it would be prudent to furnish the genealogy which is as follows:Gangadhar1. Raghunath (died before 1931): Ratramani (died)2. Lokanath ...
Purna Chandra Panda (Dead) Through His Legal Heirs Vs. Chaitanya Mahap ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jun-22-2009
Reported in: 108(2009)CLT384
A.S. Naidu, J.1. This Second Appeal Under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure is filed by the successors of Defendant of Title Suit No. 1/252 of 1986/1984 of the Court of Addl. Munsif-cum-J.M.S.C., Puri. The said suit was filed by Respondent Nos. 1 & 2, as Plaintiffs, inter alia, praying for declaring the note of possession of Puma Chandra Panda, the original Defendant made in the R.O.R., Ext.1 published on July 8,1980 by the Assistant Consolidation Officer as wrong, illegal & consequently to delete the same & for permanent injunction restraining the Defendants from coming over the suit land & creating disturbances in the peaceful possession of the Plaintiffs, in the alternative if it is found that during pendency of the suit the Plaintiffs have been dispossessed from the suit land to restore their possession.2. The suit schedule properties, as would be evident from the schedule of the plaint, appertains to Consolidation R.O.R. Plot No. 188 having an area of Ac.0.10 dec. out of ...
Mukunda Dhal @ Mukundagarag Dhal and ors. Vs. Sri Bhagabat GoswaIn and ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jun-22-2009
Reported in: 108(2009)CLT341
A.S. Naidu, J.1. Defendants of T.S No. 11 of 1975 of the Court of the then Subordinate Judge, Dhenkanal have filed this Second Appeal assailing the Judgment & decree passed in the said suit which was confirmed by the Learned District Judge, Dhenkanal in T.A No. 21 of 1982.2. Bereft of unnecessary details the short facts which are necessary for effectual adjudication are stated here-in-below:Respondent Nos. 1 & 2 filed T.S No. 11 of 1975 with a prayer for declaration of their right, title & interest over the lands more-f ully described in the suit schedule & for confirmation of possession & in the alternative, recovery of possession. According to the plaint case, they were the marfatdars of the deity Sri Bhagabat Goswain of village: Nihalprasad, P.S: Gondia in the district of Dhenkanal & their grandfather endowed a piece of land measuring an area of Ac.0.03 decimals appertaining to Plot No. 879 in favour of the deity. It is averred that originally their grandfather had built a thatched ...
Benudhar Hota and ors. Vs. Jagannath Nayak and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jun-22-2009
Reported in: 108(2009)CLT349
A.S. Naidu, J.1. This is an appeal under Section 44 of the Orissa Hindu Religious Endowments Act, 1951 (for short O.H.R.E. Act). The Judgment dated 5th June 1999 passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Endowments in F.A. No. 5/1994 is assailed in this appeal. On the basis of a petition filed by Respondent No. 1 under Section 41 of the O.H.R.E. Act. praying for a declaration that the institution of Deity Sri Jagannath, Balabhadra & Subhadra Bije at village Kulba is a private Deity & the properties described in the schedule of the petition were private endowment of Respondent No. 1, O.A. No. 16/1980 was registered in the Court of Addl. Asst. Commissioner of Endowments, Sambalpur.2. In the petition it is averred that Sanandram Naik, the father of Respondent No. 1 migrated to village Kulba from Bilaigarh situated in the district of Sundargarh ages back. At the relevant time no temple or Hindu Religious Institution existed in village Kulba which had population of tribals mostly. Sanandram Naik...
Benirani Ray and ors. Vs. Ashok Kumar Ghosh and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jun-22-2009
Reported in: AIR2010Ori7; 108(2009)CLT362
A.S. Naidu, J.1. Durga Charan Ray, the Predecessor in interest of the present Appellants, as Plaintiff filed T.S. No. 25/1976. in the Court of the then Munsif, 2nd Court, Cuttack, inter alia, praying for declaration that the sale deed dtd.12.2.1976 executed by Madhusudan Ray (Defendant No. 4) in favour of original Defendant Nos. 1 to 3, as illegal & invalid & to confirm the possession of the Plaintiff, over the suit lands & also to permanently restrain the original Defendants 1 to 3 from interfering with the possession of the Plaintiffs over the suit lands or in the alternative if the sale deed dtd.12.2.1976 is held to be genuine document for granting an opportunity to Plaintiffs to purchase the suit lands covered under the said sale deed.The Trial Court decreed the suit on contest. Being aggrieved the Defendants 1 to 3 filed an appeal in the Court of Addt. District & Sessions Judge, Cuttack which was registered as T.A. No. 63/77, the Appellate Court allowed the appeal in part. The sal...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »