Orissa Court June 2010 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.
Jayanti Pradhan and ors. Vs. State of Orissa and anr.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jun-29-2010
1. Heard learned counsel for all parties. Perused the record. In this application under Section 482, Cr.P.C., the petitioners challenge the continuance of the criminal proceeding in G.R. Case No.283 of 2005 pending in the court of learned J.M.F.C., Pattamundai and pray for quashing the order of cognizance and the said proceeding.2. In the aforesaid G.R. Case the petitioners are facing prosecution for alleged commission of offences under Sections 341/323/343/365/417/379/506/34 of the I.P.C., for which the learned J.M.F.C. has taken cognizance. The said case was initiated on the basis of the F.I.R. lodged by the present opposite party no.2 alleging inter alia that petitioner no.4, with the promise of marriage, had kept physical relationship with her. 3. He was also trying to disturb other marriage proposals of the informant. On 12.07.2005, the marriage of the informant was settled at Dandisahi, but on the same day petitioner nos. 1 and 2, who are the parents of petitioner no.4, took the ...
Prasant Kumar Sahoo. Vs. State of Orissa .
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jun-29-2010
The petitioner in this application under section 439 Cr.P.C. has approached this Court for the second time for grant of bail. He is a co-accused in C.T. Case No. 1 of 2009 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 1991 of 2007 arising out of Saheednagar P.S. Case No. 155 of 2007 now pending trial in the court of the learned Sessions Judge, Khurda at Bhubaneswar. Accusation of commission of offence under sections 364(A)/302/201/120-B IPC read with sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act has been made against the accused persons.2. This Court earlier, while dealing with the prayer for bail made by the petitioner in BLAPL No. 5766 of 2008, by order dated 18.6.2008 taking note of the allegations made by the prosecution recorded as follows:-"The offence is a very heinous one involving kidnap of two persons and murder of at least one of them. The whereabouts of Rasmi Ranjan is not yet known nor it is known whether he is dead or alive. Contrary to the assertion of the learned counsel for the petitioner, the ...
Ramesh Chandra Samantaray. Vs. State of OrissA.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jun-24-2010
1. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking for issuance of a writ of certiorari to quash the retendering notice vide Annexure-7 and further to issue a writ of mandamus to the opposite party No.2 i.e. Chief Construction Engineer, Kanpur Irrigation Project, Keonjhar direction him for issuance of a work order in his favour in respect of the work covered under Annexure-1 tender notice by accepting his bid offer urging various facts and legal contentions.2. The brief facts, for the purpose of appreciating the rival legal contentions urged on behalf of the parties, are that opposite party No.2 published a tender notice both in website as well as in daily News Paper inviting on-line item rate tenders fixing the date and time for submitting the tender paper from 10.11.2008 to 26.11.2008. The petitioner after down-loading the tender call notice from the website, submitted his tender documents within the prescribed time. The estimated cost of the project was Rs.798.22 lakhs i...
Bata Krushna Sahoo. Vs. State of OrissA.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jun-23-2010
1. This revision is directed against judgment dated 2.5.2002 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court II, Cuttack in Criminal Appeal No.22 of 2000 confirming the judgment dated 26.4.2000 passed by Additional C.J.M.(Spl.)-Cum- Asst. Sessions Judge, Cuttack in S.T. Case No.276/48 of 1998 by which the petitioner was convicted under Sections 450 and 376 of the Indian Penal Code (for short 'I.P.C.') and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months, under Section 450 of the I.P.C., and to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months, under Section 376 of the I.P.C.2. Petitioner and victim-informant P.W.5 are co-villagers. During the period of occurrence P.W.5's husband was employed and residing at Surat. Petitioner was a student of +2 Second Year Arts. Prosecution case is that the occur...
Smt. Chandrama Biswal @ Chanduri Biswal. Vs. Banchhanidhi Biswal.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jun-23-2010
1. This revision is directed against the order dated 2.9.2003 passed by the learned Ist Additional Sessions Judge, Aska in Criminal Revision Petition No. 23 of 1999 (110 of 1990 GDC) setting aside the order dated 30.7.1998 passed by the learned J.M.F.C., Aska in Misc. Case No. 31 of 1997 by which the opposite party-husband had been directed to pay Rs.200/- per month to the petitioner-wife towards her maintenance for the date of filing of the application under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C.2. Till 1979, petitioner and opposite party along with their four daughters and two sons were residing in Nagaland where opposite party was employed. Three of their daughters got married by 1985. In order to get the daughters married and sons educated, the petitioner started residing in the opposite party's native village Gudiali near Aska. Opposite party and the elder son remained in Nagaland. At present the petitioner is residing in Aska, whereas, after his retirement in 1996, the opposite party is livi...
Union of India and Another. Vs. M/S Sri Ramakrishna Constructions and ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jun-23-2010
1. Date of hearing-8.4.2010 :: Date of judgment 23.06.2010 B.K.PATEL, J. Both Misc. Appeal No.971 of 1999 and Civil Revision No.401 of 1999 are directed against the judgment dated 29.7.1999 and decree dated 13.8.1999 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), 1 st Court,Cuttack in Title Suit No.25 of 1996, a proceeding under section 20 of the Arbitration Act,1940 ( for short, 'the Act') filed by the respondent/ opposite party no.1-plaintiff against the appellants/petitioners- defendants. Misc.Appeal No.971 of 1999 filed under section 39(1)(iv) of the Act is directed against that part of the impugned judgment by which defendants were directed to file the original agreement entered into between the parties and Civil Revision No.401 of 1999 is directed against that part of the impugned judgment by which Arbitrator for adjudication of the dispute between the parties was appointed. Respondent no.2 was impleaded in the appeal and the revision at the instance of appellants/petitione...
Raghunath Sahoo and ors. Vs. State of Orissa and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jun-23-2010
1. The petitioners call in question the order dated 17.4.2001 passed by the Addl. District Judge, Khurda in Civil RevisionNo.6 of 2000 dismissing the revision and confirming the order dated 20.4.2000 passed by the learned Civil Judge(Sr.Division)Khurda in T.S.No.113 of 1999.2. Opp.party No.2 as plaintiff filed T.S.No.113 of 1999 before the court of learned Civil Judge (Sr.Division)Khurda for declaration of his right, title and interest over the suit properties as described in Schedule A,B and C of the plaint, confirmation of possession of Schedule B and C properties and eviction of opp.party No.3(Defendant No.1)from Schedule A property and recovery of Rs.17,500/-from her along with damage @ Rs.50/- per day and for permanent injunction.3. As per the case of opp.party No.2 he let out the house standing over A schedule property in favour of opp.party no.3 and one Snehalata Samantaray on a monthly rent of Rs.1000/-.As they defaulted in making payment of rent, opp.party no.2 issued notice f...
Bidyutlata Nayak. Vs. Smt. Sucheta SamantA.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jun-23-2010
1. The petitioner calls in question the judgment dated 10.9.2008 passed by learned District Judge, Dhenkanl in F.A.O.No.26 of 2007 reversing the judgment dated 18.8.2007 passed by learned Civil Judge (Jr.Ddivision) Dhenkanal in Election Petition No.24 of 2007 declaring the election of opp.party to the office of Sarpanch of Digambarpur G.P. as null and void and consequentially declaring the petitioner as duly elected Sarpanch in her place.2. The petitioner, sole opp.party and three others contested for the office of Sarpanch of Digambarpur G.P. under Gondia Block in the district of Dhenkanal held on 19.2.2007.Since the opp.party polled the highest number of votes, she was declared elected to the said office on 22.2.2007.3. Being aggrieved with the declaration of the said result, the petitioner filed Election Petition No.24 of 2007 before learned Civil Judge (Jr.Division) Dhenkanal (hereinafter referred to as 'Election Tribunal') along with a petition for condonation of delay in filing i...
M/S. Haraparbati Construction. Vs. State of Orissa and ors.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jun-23-2010
1. The petitioner, one of the tenderers, has filed this writ petition seeking for issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the opposite parties to finalize the tender and execute necessary deed of agreement for issuance of work order in its favour in respect of Package Nos. 2 and 4 (Kansabansa RD 31.00 KM to 21.00 KM and Kansabansa 10.00 KM to 0.00 KM) respectively and for a declaration that in the event the opposite parties have executed agreement with any disqualified bidder, the same may be deemed to be illegal, inoperative and untenable with a further prayer to quash the same in respect of the aforesaid package nos. 2 and 4 urging various facts and legal contentions.2. After the filing of this writ petition, vide order dated 18.1.2010, the petitioner has impleaded opposite party nos.6 and 7 -2- in whose favour the contract has been awarded in respect of the aforesaid items of civil work. 3. Facts in brief are stated as under:Opposite party no.4 by e procurement notice No.5/08-09 fi...
Ranedra Pratap SwaIn and anr. Vs. Ramesh Rout.
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Jun-23-2010
1.The petitioner, in Election Petition No.4 of 2009 challenges the declaration of result dated 16.05.2009 declaring the sole Respondent, Ramesh Rout, to have been elected as Member of the Orissa Legislative Assembly from 89-Athagarh Assembly Constituency on the ground that rejection of his nomination by the Returning Officer is illegal and improper. He has prayed to: i) declare the election of the respondent to be void;ii) declare that a casual vacancy has been created so far as it relates to 89-Athagarh Assembly Constituency andiii) Direct the appropriate authority to conduct election with respect of 89-Athagarh Assembly Constituency within the time specified/prescribed under law and other ancillary reliefs.In Election Petition No.6 of 2009, Rabindra Nath Rout has also challenged the said election on the same ground substantially with the same prayer. So, both the election petitions were heard analogously and as such a common judgment is passed there under.2. The schedule of election ...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »