Court : Orissa
Decided on : Dec-15-1964
Reported in : AIR1965Ori193
..... held that bona fide mistake committed by a pleader in calculating the period of limitation may constitute a sufficient cause within the meaning of section 5 of the act. whether a miscalculation constitutes a sufficient cause in a particular case be decided by the high court with regard to all the facts and circumstances of that case ..... cases there was limitation by mistaken calculation adopting the process of double exclusion and that the bench order cannot be supported.the explanation to section 5 of the act does not assist mr. mohapatra's contention. sri bhutia in his affidavit does not state that he was misled by the aforesaid orders of the high court ..... point out that consideration of bona fides or due diligence are always material and relevant when the court is dealing with applications made under section 14 of the limitation act. in dealing with such applications the court is called upon to consider the effect of the combined provisions of sections 5 and 14. therefore, in our opinion, .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Decided on : May-06-1964
Reported in : AIR1965Ori81; (1965)ILLJ335Ori
..... also net mentioned in the alleged second show cause notice, dated 28th september, 1962 (annexure vii filed by the petitioner). as this document (annexure vii) constitutes the foundation of the argument on this aspect of the case that neither the findings nor a fair summary of the findings of dr. s. k. mirsa the enquiring officer, ..... of natural justice ought to be followed. but it does not necessarily follow that these principles of natural justice need not be followed in respect of administrative or executive acts. the recent judgment of the house of lords in ridge v. baldwin, (1963) 1 wlr 935 has settled this question beyond any doubt. there, lord ..... kept pending till there was a proposal for appointment of an additional director for the family planning for the state of orissa. mr. sitakantha misra, the then acting director of health, himself wanted to be the additional director after his reversion from the post of director of health services, and the petitioner submitted a representation .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Decided on : Jan-16-1964
Reported in : AIR1964Ori233
..... against the state. there were previously thatched houses on the suit-sites which the plaintiff demolished with a view to construct pucca houses and 'aid foundation therefor over the entire area covering all the items. thereafter the berhampur municipality issued' notice alleging encroachment by the plaintiff, but the proceedings were dropped ..... they did notcomply and he paid the 'penalty in order to avoid furthertrouble. the authorities, however started proceedings forencroachment under the madras land encroachment act,1905 and passed orders for his eviction from the suit lands. hence the plaintiff filed the present suit claiming that there is in fact no encroachment ..... land cannot be disputed. the plaintiff admitted the said position and also paid the penalty imposed for his encroachment the provision of the land encroachment act makes it clear that all lands wherever situated shall be the property of the government except as otherwise specified. that mere long continued possession for .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Decided on : Apr-09-1964
Reported in : AIR1964Ori241; (1965)ILLJ173Ori
..... to send the documents to handwriting expert whose opinion in the matter cannot of course be conclusive. these criticisms relate to pure assessment of evidence and the tribunal acted within its jurisdiction in recording the finding that voucher no. 70 was forged. there was no denial of reasonable opportunity on this count also.13. it is ..... law be taken to be well settled:(i) high court cannot sit in appeal over the findings recorded by a tribunal in a departmental inquiry. the former would act beyond its jurisdiction if it purports to re-appreciate the evidence, and cannot interfere unless the finding are based on no evidence. (ii) the inquiry held by ..... from 1-6-50 to 12.3.54 accrued to the petitioner.the aforesaid conclusion is not, however, enough to grant relief to the petitioner. article102, limitation act, runs as follows:''for wages not otherwise three when the wages expressly provided for years. accrue due.'by this schedule.it was authoritatively pronounced in air 1947 fc 23 .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Decided on : Nov-26-1964
Reported in : AIR1966Ori98
..... . he relied upon a decision of the privy council reported in air 1947 pc 189, appalaswami v. suryanarayana murty where their lordships held that it is dangerous to construe the act of generosity or kindness as admission of legal obligation. the fact that at the instance of the mediators assisting in the partition one of the members of the joint family .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Decided on : Dec-22-1964
Reported in : AIR1965Ori138
..... 42/- per month or to such other rate as the court would deem proper under the altered circumstances, under section 14(2) of the impartible estates act (madras act ii of 1904). 2. defendants 2 and 3 did not contest. defendants 4 and 5 filed written statement alleging that they are entitled to maintenance and marriage ..... s claim for reduction of the quantum of maintenance payable to defendant-1 constitutes a right, and it has received statutory recognition under section 14 of the madras act, we accordingly hold that the plaintiff's claim in the suit constitutes a right. the further point for consideration is whether that right is a periodically recurring ..... arise for consideration before their lordships, the married daughter was entitled to maintenance in that case under section 12 which lays down: 'nothing contained in this act shall affect the right to maintenance out of an impartible estate and income thereof, of any other relations of the proprietor or any previous proprietor under any .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Decided on : Dec-22-1964
Reported in : AIR1965Ori201
..... settlement dated 11-8-1960 executed by pro forma defendant no. 2 ....'it was for the plaintiffs to prove that the deed of settlement or gift which was the very foundation of the plaintiffs' alleged title, was in the interest of the deities and that there was concurrence of the whole family as required by law for its very validity. it ..... -appellant was thus found to have been in possession even prior to the execution of the deed of gift in favour of the plaintiffs.24. section 110 of the evidence act provides that when the question is whether any person is owner of anything of which he is shown to be in possession, the burden of proving that he is not ..... himself the, absolute authority to revoke, even so it does not take away the character of the document as a deed of gift. section 126 of the transfer of property act provides to the effect that the donor and the donee may agree that on the happening of any specified event which does not depend on the will of the donor .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Decided on : Mar-11-1964
Reported in : AIR1964Ori262; 1964CriLJ696
..... the truth of the statement but the fact that it was made. in paragraph 8, however, his lordship observed that the statement is admissible under section 8, evidence act. this observation appears contrary to what was said in paragraph 5. at any rate, if the decision purports to lay down that the statement is admissible under section 8 ..... the transaction which resulted in his death. neither the cause of balaram's death comes into question. so ex. 19 is not admissible under section 32(1), evidence act, as a substantive piece of evidence. ex. 19 is therefore inadmissible in evidence. the learned sessions judge completely missed this point and did not avert to it in ..... evidence as it was recorded in the course of investigation and that it is admissible only for the limited purpose of establishing balarain's conduct under section 8, evidence act. in order to appreciate his contention, certain facts are to be mentioned in detail. p. w. 21 was cutting paddy from mahimamani lands as a labourer of .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Decided on : Dec-09-1964
Reported in : AIR1965Ori126; 1965CriLJ107
Barman, J.1. Khetra Mohan Singh, contingent Bill Clerk attached to the Bacteriologist section of the Veterinary Directorate, Government of Orissa, was acquitted of the charge of having committed criminal breach of trust in respect of Rs. 700 admittedly entrusted with him by the Treasury Sarkar in the Office of the Director of Veterinary Services, Orissa, Cuttack. The defence of the accused was that he handed over the money to the Drawing Officer of the bill in question.2. On March 26, 1961, the accused gave for encashment a contingent bill for Rs. 700 to the Treasury Sarkar in Cuttack Veterinary Office. The treasury Sarkar drew the amount from the State Rank of India, Cuttack and made over the entire amount of Rs. 700 to the accused on the very date he received the money from the Bank. On March 28, 1961 the accused had given a receipt Ex. 1 in favour of the Treasury Sarkar for the said amount, The prosecution case is that the accused Bill clerk did not hand over the Bill amount of Rs. ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Decided on : Oct-22-1964
Reported in : AIR1967Ori194
..... interlocutory proceedings in a suit, the court can issue interrogatories under section 151, c. p. c. in respect of matter arising under section 24 of the act, there is no provision in the code of civil procedure expressly prohibiting that the remedy, prescribed in order 11 would not be available to interlocutory proceedings. in ..... section 141, c. p. c. is also to be taken into consideration, it must be read subject to the special procedure prescribed under section 21 of the act the maxim generalia specialibus non derogant (general provisions will not abrogate special provisions) or generalibus specialia derogant (special things derogate from general) applies to matters of procedural ..... of civil jurisdiction. he contends that civil procedure code has no application to interlocutory matters in a suit or proceeding, and that the proceeding under section 24 of the act being interlocutory. order 11 has no application. if one has to resort to section 141, c. p. c. there may be some force in saying .....
Tag this Judgment!