Court : Orissa
Decided on : Jan-02-1985
Reported in : AIR1985Ori102; 1985(I)OLR102
ORDERK.P. Mohapatra, J. 1. The opposite parties obtained a decree with costs against the petitioners in Title Suit No. 35 of 1967 on 11-9-1970 in the Court of the learned Munsif, Panposh to the following effect :-- 'The right, title and interest of the petitioners over the suit premises and shed are declared. The Defendants are permanently restrained to farther construct and they are directed to demolish the alleged construction made by them. It is further ordered that if the defendants do not demolish the construction made by them within a month from this date the plaintiffs be entitled to get it demolished through Court' The opposite parties levied execution on 21-3-1980 in Execution Case No. 3 of 1980 praying therein 'demolition of the construction made by the defendants on the suit land and realisation of the costs of the (sic) (suit) and the costs of this execution by attachment and sale of the moveables of the judgment debtors'. The petitioners after appearance objected to the ex...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Decided on : Feb-05-1985
Reported in : AIR1985Ori153; 1985(I)OLR345
G.B. Patnaik, J.1. In these two writ petitions, the action of the financial institution, namely, the Orissa State Financial Corporation (hereinafter referred to as the 'Corporation') is being impugned by the entrepreneur essentially on the ground that the action of opposite party No. 1, the Corporation, is arbitrary and is calculated to confer undue favour on the Orissa Ceramic Industries Limited (opp. party No. 3 in O J.C. 340 of 1984 and opp. party No. 2 in O J.C. 427 of 1984). The petitioner also alleges that no due notice of the impugned action being given to the petitioner, there has been a flagrant violation of the principles of natural justice and consequently, the action of the Corporation is vitiated.2. After the country became independent, the Industrial Finance Corporation Act came to be enacted in 1948 to set up a Corporation called 'Industrial Finance Corporation' with the object that the said Corporation would provide long-term credits to industrial undertakings. With the...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Decided on : May-09-1985
Reported in : 1986(23)ELT38(Ori); 1985(II)OLR56
B.N. Misra, J.1. This writ application arises in the following circumstances. On 14. 11. 1970 the petitioner went to Bhadrak Post Office to collect a parcel. After he had received the parcel, Officers of the Central Excise Department asked him to open the parcel and in the presence of witnesses the officers seized 56 pieces of round gold welded rods weighing 1214. 500 grams in two packets covered with two Gujrati newspapers. A Panchnama was prepaed at the spot and handed over to the petitioner, vide Annexure-1. The statement made by the petitioner at the time of seizure is Annexure-2. His plea was that one of his friends in Bombay named Sangvi had sent gold ornaments to him and that he would make payment for the gold later on receipt of money from his grand-father. The Deputy Collector, Central Excise, Bhubaneswar, opposite party No. 1, asked the; petitioner to show cause why appropriate action should not be taken against him for contravention of the provisions contained in See. 8(1) o...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Decided on : Jun-27-1985
Reported in : AIR1986Ori215
S.C. Mohapatra, J.1. This writ application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India arises out of a proceeding under Chap. IV of the Orissa Land Reforms Act, 1960 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act').2. The Revenue Officer, Sundargarh initiated a suo motu proceeding under Section 42 of the Act for determining the ceiling surplus lands in the hand of the family of Khiradhar Patel, petitioner No. 1. Khiradhar objected to the draft statement on various grounds one of them being that there has been a partition among Khiradhar and his three sons, petitioners 2 to 4 since the year 1963. The Revenue Officer disbelieved the partition. He came to the conclusion.'....I hold that the younger sons are notseparate from the date of execution of the partition deed....'3. Taking the family to be consisting of five members, the Revenue Officer allowed 10.68 standard acres to be retained and declared 5.52 standard acres as surplus land. This order was confirmed in an appeal under Section 44(2) o...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Decided on : Aug-27-1985
Reported in : 1985(II)OLR398
S.C. Mohapatra, J.1. This is an appeal from jail. The High Court Legal Aid and Advice Committee has engaged Mr. K.C. Mohanti, Advocate, for representing the appellant. The appellant has been convicted under Section 302, Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short I. P. C. ) and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life. He has also been convicted under Section 324,I.P.C. but no separate sentence has been awarded on that Count.2. Appellant is a resident of Kolhapada of village Mirgamunda. On 25.6. 1980, at about 1 p. m. he was seen naked with a Tangia in hand entering into the house of P. W. 12 in the same pada. He assaulted the deceased Koyili Dei wife of P. W. 12 on her head by the sharp side of the Tangia causing fatal injuries. On protest by P. W. 12, the appellant also assaulted him on his face below the nose. Coming out of the house, when the appellant was proceeding towards the tank of the village, be saw one Abhimanyu going on a cycle. Stating Abhimanyu to kill him, the appellant chased ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Decided on : Sep-05-1985
Reported in : 1986(10)ECC248
P.C. Misra, J.1. 'This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the validity of the order of detention under Section 3(1) of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (for short, 'the Act'). The petitioner is a resident of Bargarh in the district of Samabalpur who was served with the order of detention dated 10-6-1985 (Annexure-1) along with the grounds of detention and some documents in support thereof to the effect that with a view to preventing him from smuggling primary gold of foreign origin and foreign make wrist watches, engaging and transporting, concealing and keeping these smuggled goods and dealing in these smuggled goods, his detention under Section 3(1) of the Act is necessary. The petitioner was arrested and detained with effect from 12-6-1985. On receipt of the order of detention as aforesaid, the petitioner submitted his representation on 28-6-1985.2. According to the petitioner, there has been ...
Tag this Judgment!