Orissa Court August 2011 Judgments

Akshaya Kumar Patra Vs. State of Orissa

Court: Orissa

I. MAHANTY, J. 1. This application under Section-482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioner-accused seeking to challenge the order dated 13.09.2010 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Athagarh in S.T. Case No.33 of 2006 arising out of Athagarh P.S. Case No.49 of 2000, whereby, an application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. to summon one Palu @ Ajaya Kumar Barik, the younger brother of deceased Kalu @ Bijay Kumar Barik filed on behalf of the prosecution, came to be allowed. 2. Mr. Sangam Kumar Sahoo, learned counsel for the petitioner has sought to assail the impugned order dated 13.09.2010, on the ground that the impugned order suffers from error of record and non-application of judicial mind to the ratio of various cited decisions, in the context of the facts and circumstances of the present case and, therefore, is liable to be set aside. Mr. Sahoo, submitted that the petitioner is facing trial for the alleged offence under Section 302/34 I.P.C. in the court...

Chakradhar Paital (Dead) L.Rs. and Others Vs. Gelhi Bewa (Dead) L.Rs. ...

Court: Orissa

B.K. NAYAK, J. 1. Judgment-debtors in Execution Case No.4 of 2009 of the court of the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division) Second Court, Cuttack have filed this writ application challenging the order dated 27.12.2010 passed by the Executing Court rejecting their objection to execution. 2. The decree holder-opposite parties filed T.S. No.6 of 1987 against the judgment-debtors and some of their predecessors-in-interest for permanent injunction. The suit was decreed on 24.06.1995 injuncting permanently the defendants-Judgment-debtors from interfering with the peaceful possession of the decree holders over the suit land. The decree holders filed Execution Case No.4 of 2009 for executing the decree by way of recovery of possession on the assertion that on 06.03.2009, the judgment-debtors interfered with their peaceful possession and forcibly encroached the suit land by dispossessing them. The judgment-debtors filed their objection to the execution petition contending that the decree being ...

Orissa State Electricity Board Vested in Grid Corporation of Orissa Li ...

Court: Orissa

B.K. PATEL, J. 1. Defendant no.1 is in appeal against the judgment and decree dated 29.4.2002 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Bhubaneswar in M.S.No.287 of 1987. Respondent no.1 was the sole plaintiff whereas proforma respondents 2 to 4 were other defendants in the suit. 2. Plaintiff filed suit for realization of Rs.5,35,574.70p towards dues for execution of work contract along with pendente lite and future interest as well as cost. In terms of agreement in work contract underExt.1, plaintiff was entrusted by the defendants with the work of construction of 48 E-type quarters inside Talcher Thermal PowerStation compound area. Estimated cost for construction wasRs.17,07,920/-. As per the agreement construction of quarters was to be completed on 2.2.1985. However, on plaintiff’s prayer for extension of time under Ext.A series time for construction of work was extended. Plaintiff submitted no-claim certificate dated 30.7.1984 under Ext.B in respect of construction...

Shyam Naik and Others Vs. General Manager, East Coast Railway, Rail Vi ...

Court: Orissa

Reported in: 2012AIR(Ori)38

V. GOPALA GOWDA,C.J. 1. The Petitioners (1st petitioner is the father and others are the minor children of the deceased represented by grandfather-1st petitioner) for the death of the deceased Dharani Naik who died on account of railway accident claiming compensation to the tune of Rs. 4 lakhs, which is the minimum liability of the Railway authority to a passenger as per Section 124 of the Railway Act, 1989, urging various facts and legal contentions. 2. The brief facts as stated in the petition is that on 8-7-2000 at about 12.00 midnight while one Dharani Naik son of petitioner No.1 was returning from the other side of the village crossing the railway line, a train coming in high speed from Boinda towards, Sargipalli without blowing horn, dashed against the deceased. Consequently Dharani Naik died at the spot and accordingly petitioner No.1 lodged an F.I.R. in the Hondapa Police Station as per Annexure-1. It is further stated that the railway line passes through the village Gundurimun...

Union of India and Another Vs. S.N. Kanungo and Another

Court: Orissa

This appeal by the Union of India and its functionary is directed against the order dated 12.08.2009, passed by the District Judge, Khurda, Bhubaneswar, in ARB Petition No.135 of 2009, dismissing the appellants application filed under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, being barred by limitation. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that as the signed copy of the award had not been delivered to the appellant no.2, who was the signatory to the Agreement of which, the Arbitral Tribunal is a creature and he was also a necessary party to the arbitration proceeding before the Arbitral Tribunal, learned Court below erred in ignoring the said fact while passing the impugned order. Learned counsel for the appellants has referred to Section 34(3) and Section 31(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short ‘The Act’) in support of his contention that the period of limitation as prescribed under Section 34(3) of the Act would only commence f...

M/S. Premier Sheet, Bhubaneswar Khurda Vs. Managing Director, Orissa S ...

Court: Orissa

Reported in: 2012AIR(Ori)48

V. GOPALA GOWDA, C.J. 1. The Petitioner M/s. Premier Sheet which is loanee of the Orissa State Financial Corporation (hereinafter called in short ‘OSFC’) has filed this writ petition seeking for issuance of a writ of certiorari to quash the notice dated 2-1-2010 and further sought for a mandamus directing to the Corporation to settle its account pursuant to the application dated 19-11-2007 under Annexure-3 in the spirit of the OTS Scheme and a writ of prohibition restraining the opposite parties from taking any coercive action against the Petitioner’s unit under the provisions of the Act urging various facts and legal contention. 2. Necessary brief facts are stated for the purpose of appreciating the rival legal contention urged on behalf of the parties. The petitioner has its registered office at D-2/7, Mancheswar Industrial Estate, Bhubaneswar in the district of Khurda. The petitioner-Industry was initially involved in manufacture of poly-propylene and low density p...