Court : Orissa
Reported in : AIR2006Ori78; 101(2006)CLT326
P.K. Tripathy, J.1. This appeal has come on the list as 'to be mentioned'. Heard further argument from both the parties and the judgment is as follows.2. Sole plaintiff in Title Suit No. 14 of 1974 of the Court of Subordinate Judge, Rourkela filed this appeal. Defendant No. 2 in that suit claiming to be the purchaser of the suit land, has filed Cross Objection challenging to the finding recorded by Learned Subordinate Judge on issue No. 4. Both appeal and the cross objection are heard and disposed of by this common judgment.3. Admittedly, late Kanaihalal Nau was the owner of the suit land measuring an area of one and half decimals. In fact, he was owner of three decimals of land of plot No. 266, i.e., the suit plot. Admittedly he alienated one and half decimals of land to the sole plaintiff Muralilal Agrawal. According to the case of the plaintiff, one thatched house was there on each of the said Ac. 0.01 and 1/2 decimals of land possessed by the plaintiff and his vender. Plaintiff and...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : AIR1998Ori76; 85(1998)CLT435
D.M. Patnaik, J.1. The second appeal is against the confirming judgments of the Courts below dismissing the plaintiffs suit for partition where in she claims half share in the property situate in village Surubali.2. Plaintiff's case is that her father Nutunu Mohanla had two wives, the elder one being Lata having predecesed Nutun and the second wile Nirasa, mother of the plaintiff. It is claimed that Nirasa died sometime during 1958 leaving behind the plaintiff as the sole heir. Lata had two daughters namely Domani and Nali. Defendant No. 1 is the daughter of Domani and defendants 3, 4 and 5 are sons of Nali. It is the plaintiff's case that she was jointly enjoying the property along with Domuni and Nali and after death of Nali the parties also lived jointly and possessed the land but sometime thereafter they deprived the plaintiff from enjoyment of the properly without giving any share to her even though she demanded for the same. Therefore, she filed the suit for partition.3. The defe...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : AIR1998Ori147
R.K. Dash, J. 1. The petitioner in the present application filed under Articles 136 and 127 of the Constitution of India has challenged the action of the Stale and its functionaries reserving three constitueneies for women belonging to backward class of citizens in Narsinghpur Panchayal Samiti and consequently has prayed to quash the final list of the constituencies, Anncxure 3.2. To put shortly, the case of the petitioner is that there are in total 26 Constituencies in Narasinghpur Panchayat Samiti and of them 6 are reserved for scheduled castes (4 male and 2women). I for scheduled tribe (male), 7 for backward class citizens (5 male and 2 women) and 12 for general candidates (7 male and 5 women). Preliminary publication of the it of the constituencies as aforesaid was made which is in accordance with the provisions of the Orissa Panchayat Samiti (Amendment) Act, 1995 (for short, 'the Act'). Subsequently the Collector, Cuttack-opposite party no. 2 published a revised and final list of ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : 2001(I)OLR134
L. Mohapatra, J.1. The petitioner who alleges to have been sexually harassed and misbehaved by the Co-ordinator of Centre for Development Research & Training (for short, 'CENDERET') of Xavier Institute of Management (for short, 'the Institute'), Bhubaneswar, has prayed for the following directions :(a) Direction to the State Government to provide adequate security/ protection from harassment caused to the petitioner by the Co-ordinator and also by the Director.(b) Enquire into the matter of sexual harassment and misbehaviour to the petitioner and other lady employees in the Institute by an independent agency under the direct supervision of this Court.(c) Enquire into the matter and take appropriate action against the Director of the Institute for making the complaint of the petitioner public, causin-g more harassment and violating her decency and dignity in the public.(d) To enquire into the matter as to how the Director sent a semi- nude photograph along with the petitioner's photogra...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : AIR1958Ori47
Mohapatra, J.1. This second appeal has been filed by defendants 1 and 2 against the reversing judgment of Sri T.V. Rao, Subordinate Judge of Balasore, dated 15th July 1950, arising out of a suit brought by the original plaintiff Kangali Naik for declaration of title, for confirmation of possession, or, in the alternative, recovery of possession. Rushi and Kangali (the original plaintiff) were two brothers.Rushi is long dead leaving behind him his two sons Bhagirathi and Balaram. Both the brothers Bhagirathi and Balaram died in the same month, that is, October-November of 1939 and at an interval of nearly 10 or 12 days as the deaths were due to cholera. But nevertheless it is the admitted position that Balaram died first leaving behind him his only heir the widow Pitei. Pitei died after April 1944. Bhagirathi died leaving behind him his widow Keluni (defendant No. 1) and his daughter Malati (defendant No. 2). It is in respect of the interest of Balaram that the present controversy arise...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : AIR1986Ori64
ORDERD.P. Mohapatra, J.1. The defendants in SCC Case No. 13/1 of 1982 of the Court of the Subordinate Judge, Bargarh, have filed this application under Section 115, Civil P. C. challenging the order dt. 22-4-1982 decreeing the said suit.2. The opposite party filed the suit for realisation of a sum of Rs. 450/- together with pendente lite and future interest at the rate of 12 per cent per annum from the petitioner alleging, inter alia, that on 7-9-1981 the defendants purchased 115 pieces of grounds (Makhan) from the plaintiff for Rs. 450/- and promised to pay the price for the same within a week. After lapse of about one and half months on being reminded several times the defendants offered to pay Rs. 200/- only on the plea that the grounds being rotten could not be marketed. The plaintiff refused to accept the amount. On these allegations the plaintiff prayed for realisation of Rs. 450/-together with interest from the defendant towards the price of the gourds supplied to them. In para ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : 1997CriLJ3291; 1997(I)OLR247
P.K. Misra, J.1. The appellant has been convicted under Section 395 and 457, Indian Penal Code, and sentenced to undergo R. I. for 7 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/-, in default, to undergo R. I. for 6 months under Section 395 and R. I. for 2 years and fine of Rs. 1,000/-, in default, to undergo R. I. for 1 year under Section 457, Indian Penal Code. Both the sentences have been directed to run concurrently.2. The appellant along with five others were tried. All the accused except accused Managovinda Swain were charged under Section 335 and 457, whereas accused Managovinda Swain was charged under Section 412. Indian Penal Code. Except the appellant all other accused persons have been acquitted by the trial Court. 3. As per the prosecution case, as revealed from the FIR. there was a dacoity by unknown miscreants in the house of PW 2 in the night of 25/23-7-1988 and thereafter in the houses of some others of the village. After arrest of the culprits, a T. I. parade was held on 14-3-...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : (1970)ILLJ337Ori
S. Barman, C.J.1. The petitioner, Hindusthan Steel. Ltd., challenges the award of the labour court, Orissa by which it directed the management of Hindusthan Steel, Ltd., to reinstate their dismissed workman, opposite party 2, Udayanath Patra, with half of his back wages,2. The charges of misconduct on which the workman was chargesheeted, were wilful insubordination and disobedience of orders of superiors and negligence in duty resulting in stoppage of work in that on 10 August 1962, the opposite party 2, a crane operator, was asked to take out the fourth spindle at about 9-30 p.m., but he refused to carry out the order and did not do his work after 9-30 p.m. even though he had taken more than adequate relief by not working from 3-30 to 6-30 p.m. as a result of which the work had to suffer-all as stated in the chargesheet.3. There was a departmental enquiry held by an enquiry committee who found the workman guilty of gross misconduct of disobedience of orders and he was dismissed. The w...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : AIR2006Ori88
ORDERL. Mohapatra, J.1. This writ application is directed against the order dated 2-1-1995 of the Commissioner, Consolidation, Cuttack-opposite party No. 2 passed in Annexure-14 as well as the order dated 27-7-1992 of the Consolidation Officer, Jagatsinghpur-opposite party No. 4 passed in Annexure-12.2. In order to appreciate claims of respective parties the family genealogy as indicated in the writ application is reproduced below:G E N E A L O G Y--------------------Damodar |-------------------------------------------| |Ananda Janardan| || ----------------------------| | || Ananta Basudev| || Suraprasad Indumati| || ------------------| | || Saraswati Kanchan| (O.P.5)| = Sricharan-------------------------------------------------| |Alekha Banchhanidhi| || ---------------------------| | | | | Lingaraj Kapila Loknath---------------------------------------------| | |Baishnab Sadhu Sridhar (P.1)| = Malatilata (P.2)------------------- || | |Saroda Sarata |------------------------------------...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : 1993(I)OLR265
L. Rath, J.1. This appeal from jail has been preferred assailing the conviction of the appellant Under Sections 457 and 376 IPC and sentences to undergo rigorous imprisonment,for 10 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 300/- in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one month more Under Section 376, IPC and to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 200/- in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one month more Under Section 457, IPC with direction that both the sentences of imprisonment would run concurrently.2. The appellant was charge-sheeted along with another Chhotu Mahanandia but the latter having absconded the appellant alone faced the trial on the allegation that at the midnight of 12-5-1986,four persons entered into the room where the victim lady PW 5 was sleeping, through the open space available in between the thatch and the height of the wall of the room and successively gang raped her. It is the prosecution case that the victim lady was st...
Tag this Judgment!