SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1989 Supreme(Ori) 281

L.RATH
DASARATHI PARIDA – Appellant
Versus
SATYABADI PRADHAN – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Anil Deo, D. Nayak and D.P. Dhal, for the Appellant; D.P. Tripathy, for the Respondent

JUDGMENT :

L. Rath, J. - This revision is directed against the revisional order of. the learned Sessions Judge, Puri, reversing the order of the C.J.M., Puri giving custody of a pump set to the Petitioner on a petition u/s 94, Code of Criminal Procedure on the condition that the same shall continue in his custody in accordance with the terms of the agreement between the Petitioner and the opposite party until a competent court decides the agreement to be not genuine with the further direction that the pump set should be returned to the opposite party if the loan of Rs. 3000/- incurred by him is repaid.

2. The facts shortly, stated are that the opposite party filed a petition u/s 94, Code of Criminal Procedure before the G.J.M., Puri stating that be had purchased a pump set availing an agricultural loan from the Puri Co-operative Land Development Bank and was using it for his agriculture purpose. The Petitioner approached the opposite party for availing the services of the pump set to irrigate his Patol field. The opposite party hired out the pump set to the Petitioner on 1-2-1984 for 15 days on a charge of Rs. 100/- per day. When the opposite party approached the Petitioner on 16-2-1






Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top