Court : Orissa
1. The petitioner, Geomin Minerals & Marketing (P) Ltd. which is a Company incorporated under the Indian Companies Act, 1956, has filed this writ petition, inter alia with the following prayers:"Order the opposite parties to dispose of all pending applications for Mineral Concessions filed by the petitioner and set out in the petition in accordance with its vested right to preferential consideration in view of the fact that the petitioner's applications have been filed on the first date of availability and eligibility.Issue a writ of prohibition or any other appropriate writ, order or direction restraining the opposite parties from considering applications for Mineral Concessions of later applicants to the petitioner until the applications of the petitioner are first considered and disposed of by according priority or preferential right based on the petitioner being a first day applicant having applied for the concerned Mineral Concessions set out in the petition on the first date of a...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
1. The short question that arises for consideration in this writ application is whether the Registering Officer under the Indian Registration Act can retain possession of the original registered instrument (sale deed) where it raises a dispute in terms of Section 47-A of the Indian Stamp (Orissa Amendment) Act with regard to the stamp duty payable on such instrument.2. The facts leading to the formulation of the aforesaid question have been depicted in the writ petition as follows: The petitioner, a private limited company registered under the Companies Act, represented through its Director carries on business of development of land and construction of apartments. For the purpose of its business, the petitioner purchased a piece of Sarad non-irrigative variety of land measuring Ac.0.927 dec. pertaining to Sabik Plot No.1807 and Sabik Khata No.507 of Mouza Gadakana under Bhubaneswar Tahasil of Khurda district corresponding to Mutation Plot No.3803 and Mutation Khata No.1053/29, which fu...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : 109(2010)CLT772,2010(I)OLR760
B.K. Nayak, J.1. The short question that arises for consideration in this writ application is whether the Registering Officer under the Indian Registration Act can retain possession of the original registered instrument (sale deed) where it raises a dispute in terms of Section 47-A of the Indian Stamp (Orissa Amendment) Act with regard to the stamp duty payable on such instrument.2. The facts leading to the formulation of the aforesaid question have been depicted in the writ petition as follows:The petitioner, a private limited company registered under the Companies Act, represented through its Director carries on business of development of land and construction of apartments. For the purpose of its business, the petitioner purchased a piece of Sarad non-irrigative variety of land measuring Ac.0.927 dec. pertaining to Sabik Plot No. 1807 and Sabik Khata No. 507 of Mouza Gadakana under Bhubaneswar Tahasil of Khurda district corresponding to Mutation Plot No. 3803 and Mutation Khata No. ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
1. This writ petition has been filed seeking a direction to opposite party no.1-Sub-Registrar-cum-Stamp Collector, Khurda to return the original sale deed No.2814/2007 to the petitioner and for quashing the notice dated 16.2.2008 under Annexure-3 by which the opposite party no.1 directed the petitioner either to deposit the deficit amount of stamp duty and registration fee as calculated by him or else to contest the matter to be referred to the next higher forum.2. Short facts giving rise to this writ petition are that for maintenance of day-to-day affairs of Shree Lord Jagannath Temple, the Managing Committee after receipt of approval of the Government of Orissa for sale of the property in question published a sale notice bearing No.142 dated 8.1.1996 inviting applications from prospective purchasers. Pursuant to the said notice, prospective purchasers applied for the same. On 8.6.1996, an open auction was held. In the said open auction, the present writ petitioner became the highest ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : 109(2010)CLT529
B.K. Patel, J.1. Aggrieved by dismissal of his application for dissolution of marriage by decree of divorce under Section 13(1)(i-a) of Hindu Marriage Act (for short 'the Act') in Civil Proceeding No. 198 of 1999 by Learned Judge, Family Court, Cuttack, husband-Appellant has preferred this appeal against wife-Respondent.2. Parties are Hindus. Appellant is a native of village Bodar in the district of Cuttack. Their marriage was solemnized in Danda Bibha form on 5.1.1998. Appellant is a doctor employed under the State Government whereas Respondent is working as Senior Technical Assistant in the Department of Architect under O.U.A.T., Bhubaneswar. Appellant's father was a Government servant & working as a Health Educator prior to his retirement. It is also not disputed that parties are living in separation since 2.10.1998.3. It is asserted by the Appellant that his marriage with Respondent was solemnized in village Bodar. After the marriage the parties resided in village Bodar till the 5t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
1. The petitioners are the accused persons in I.C.C. Case No. 2710 of 2008 pending before the learned S.D.J.M., Bhubaneswar. The complaint petition was filed by the opp. party no. 1 herein, against the petitioners and other accused persons making allegation of commission of offence under sections 499/500/501/502/34 IPC . The petitioner no. 1 is the Editor of the daily Oriya newspaper, "The Dharitri" and the petitioner no. 2 is its Printer and Publisher. On the complaint petition being filed, the learned S.D.J.M. recorded the initial statement of the complainant and by order dated 26.6.2008, considering the initial deposition of the complainant and the documents available on record found that prima facie evidence of commission of offence under sections 500/501/502/34 IPC is revealed. Hence, he took cognizance of the said offences and directed issuance of process against the accused persons including the two petitioners fixing 21.7.2008 for appearance. The petitioners accused persons as ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : 2010(I)OLR963
Sunju Panda, J.1. In this writ application, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 19.8.2008 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Balasore in Civil Suit No. 80 of 2007-I partly allowing an application for amendment and partly rejecting an application for incorporating paragraphs 2 to 6 of the proposed amendment filed by the petitioner.2. To appreciate the contentions of the parties, the following facts of the case are necessary to be stated.The petitioner as plaintiff filed C.S. No. 80 of 2007-I before the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Balasore for declaration of right, title, interest, injunction and possession in respect of the suit schedule lands appertaining to Plot No. 873 measuring Ac.2.45 decimals and Plot No. 872 measuring Ac.0.06 decimals, in total Ac.2.47 decimals under Consolidation Khata No. 355/23 in Mouza-Silada. As per the settlement record, the said lands belonged to opposite party Nos. 5 to 6, who sold the same to the petitioner on payme...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : 110(2010)CLT45
B.N. Mahapatra, J.1. These ten appeals are directed against Orders Dated 30.04.1996 passed in Misc. Case Nos. 47/88 (C) 94/92, 37/86(C) 94/92, 35/85(C) 94/92, 62/84(0)94/92 & 38/87(C) 94/92 by the 3rd MACT-cum-Additional District Judge, Balasore (for short 'the Tribunal').2. Since all these appeals involve common question of law, with consent of the Learned Counsel for the parties, they were heard analogously & are disposed of by this common Judgment.3. The facts & circumstances giving rise to these appeals are that in the above five misc. cases the legal heirs of the deceased persons, who died in a vehicular accident on 14.06.1992 because of head on collision between a trekker & a truck, filed claim petitions before the Tribunal for compensation under the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 (for short 'the Act 1988'). Thereafter, the legal heirs of the deceased filed applications Under Section 140 of the Act 1988 for interim relief of Rs. 50,000 (rupees fifty thousand) under 'no fault liability'....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
1. Calling in question the correctness of the common judgment and order dated 31.03.1999 passed by the learned Special Judge (Vigilance), Sambalpur in T.R. Case Nos.26, 27, 28, 29, 30 and 31 of 1988, this appeal has been preferred by the appellant, who has been convicted for commission of offences punishable under Section 5(1)(c) read with Section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 (for short 'the P.C. Act') as well as under Section 409 and 468 of the Indian Penal Code (for short 'the I.P.C.'), in the trial on consolidation of aforenoted T.R. Cases. The appellant has been sentenced to undergo R.I. for one year and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- in default to undergo R.I. for one month under Section 5(1)(c) read with Section 5(2) of the P.C. Act, R.I. for two years and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- in default to undergo R.I. for one month under Section 409 of the I.P.C. and R.I. for one year and to pay a fine of Rs.500/- in default to undergo R.I. for six months under Section 468...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : 2010(I)OLR838
R.V. Raveendran, J.1. Leave granted. Heard learned Counsel for the appellants and respondents. We have also heard the learned Counsel for the State of Tamil Nadu and Registrar General of the Madras High Court to whom notices had been issued in regard to the interpretation of Section 92 of the Code of Civil Procedure ('Code' for short), with reference to the State Government Notification No. GOM No. 727 dated 8.3.1960.2. The respondents instituted a suit (OS No. 13 of 2006) on the file of the Principal District Judge, Cuddalore against the appellants under Section 92 of Code, seeking a direction to the second appellant to repay all the amounts spent by him after 20.6.2005 contrary to the terms of the supplementary deed of Trust, and also to convene the Trust meeting for approval of the income and expenditure and other consequential reliefs.3. Appellants 2 to 4 herein filed a memo before the District Court stating that having regard to the decision of the Madras High Court in P. S. Subra...
Tag this Judgment!