Orissa Court November 2011 Judgments
Smt. Sukanti Pattnaik Vs. Sailendra Narayan Singh and Others
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Nov-24-2011
B.K. Misra, J. The petitioner in this writ petition has challenged the legality of the order of the learned Civil Judge (Sr.Divn.) 1st Court, Cuttack dated 20.9.2011 (Annexure-3) in C.S.(I) No. 256 of 1979, where, the prayer of the present petitioner for amendment of the plaint was rejected. 2. The case of the petitioner is that her mother Rajani Rani Samantsinghar had filed T.S. No. 256 of 1979 against the original defendants Puspendra Kumari and two others for specific performance of contract and also for permanent injunction. During pendency of the suit since the original plaintiff died, the present petitioner being the only daughter was substituted. Similarly, on the death of defendant Nos. 1 and 2 during pendency of the suit, they were substituted by the legal heirs namely, defendant Nos. 2(a) to 2(h) and defendant No.2 (b) and defendant No.3 died as bachelors in the year 1998 and 2003 respectively. But though substitutions were allowed by the court but those were not incorporated...
Tag this Judgment!Rohit Kumar Behera Vs. State of Orissa
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Nov-22-2011
B.N. Mahapatra, J. 1. This writ petition has been filed for quashing/setting aside initiation of suo motu proceedings No.4/2011 and the show cause notice with statement of charges dated 20.09.2011 (Annexure-4) issued by the Competent Authority on the ground that the suo motu proceedings is an outcome of non-application of mind, improper consideration of ground reality and without authority/jurisdiction. 2. Petitioner’s case in a nutshell is that the petitioner was appointed as a Notary, Angul bearing Registration No.ON-09/2002 by the State Government and was duly authorized to practise as a Notary under the provision of Notaries Act, 1952 (for short, “Act, 1952”) and the Notaries Rules, 1956 (for short, “Rules, 1956”) for a period of 5 years which is renewable from time to time. While discharging his duty as Notary, the petitioner on 22.01.2011 had authenticated two notarial affidavits of marriage and a deed of agreement between Mamata Kumari Singh and Raj...
Tag this Judgment!State of Orissa and Others Vs. M/S. Jagannath Choudhury Special Class ...
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Nov-18-2011
Reported in: 2012AIR(NOC)194
B.N. Mahapatra, J. 1. The petitioner-State in this writ petition challenges the order dated 25.06.2010 passed by the Sole Arbitrator in ARBP No. 15 of 2008. 2. In course of hearing, the learned Standing Counsel for the State stated that though in the present writ petition the order of the Sole Arbitrator relating to four applications filed before it under Section 16 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 is challenged, the State is only pressing the application relating to finishing of security (Annexure-4) and is not pressing other three applications. 3. The petitioners’ case in a nutshell is that opposite partycontractor was awarded with a contract for construction of Left Head Regulator of Jambhira Earth Dam vide Agreement No.13 LCB/95-96 executed on 22.02.1996. The total value of contract work awarded was Rs.4,38,31,520.70. The contract work was required to be completed within 24 consecutive calendar months. The date of commencement of the contract work was 25.01.1996 ...
Tag this Judgment!M/S. Bibek Motors Vs. Pyarimohan and Pramila Trust
Court: Orissa
Decided on: Nov-17-2011
Reported in: 2012AIR(Ori)87
B.K. MISRA, J. 1. The petitioner has filed this writ petition under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the impugned order (Annexure-6) dated 22.5.2010 of the Ad hoc Additional District Judge, (Fast Track-I), Cuttack in F.A.O. No. 30 of 2010 in reversing the decision of the Civil Judge (Sr.Division), 1st Court, Cuttack in I.A. No. 125 of 2010 arising out of C.S. No. 137 of 2010. 2. The facts of the case may be briefly stated as follows:- The petitioner for carrying out her business in motor parts took shop room no.2 from Pyari Mohan and Pramila Trust in the year,2001 on monthly rent basis. It is the case of the petitioner that the said trust was created by Pyari Mohan Samantaray and his wife Pramila Sundari Devi in the name of Pyari Mohan and Pramila Trust (in short P.P. Trust) and the beneficiaries of the trust were late PyariMohan Samantaray, his wife Pramila Sundari Devi and their five sons Arun Kumar Samantaray, Dillip Kumar Samantaray, Pradyuma Kumar Saman...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›