Senior Supreme Court advocate and former Orissa High Court Chief Justice S. Muralidhar said questioning those in power is essential to ensure accountability. He stressed that a strong and independent judiciary remains the only reliable mechanism to uphold democratic checks and balances.
The Orissa High Court dismissed a husband’s plea challenging a maintenance order, observing that an educated and able-bodied man cannot avoid supporting his wife and minor children by citing financial hardship, as he is presumed capable of earning and fulfilling his legal responsibility.
The Supreme Court granted bail to a murder convict after calling the Orissa High Court’s refusal to hear his delayed appeal a “disturbing order.” The bench stressed that the High Court should have taken a practical approach there.
The Orissa High Court held that only a parent or senior citizen can file an appeal under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007. The Court quashed the Collector’s order filed on a son’s appeal and restored maintenance and residence rights of the 83-year-old mother.
Orissa High Court held that orders passed by a Bench in matters outside the roster assigned by the Chief Justice are per se illegal. The Court said entertaining cases beyond allocation amounts to jurisdiction without authority, rendering such decisions fundamentally invalid.
Orissa High Court upheld a tribunal order directing a son to vacate his father’s house, stressing dignity and safety of senior citizens. The Court ruled welfare laws must be interpreted to protect elderly parents’ peaceful living.
Orissa High Court Justice Savitri Ratho said, “I was stalked when I started practising law,” while speaking about the challenges faced by women lawyers. She shared the incident during a panel discussion on gender gaps in the judiciary at the Indian Women in Law conference held in the Supreme Court.
The Orissa High Court directed authorities to grant income tax refunds under Sections 240 and 244A with interest calculated until actual payment. It ruled that interest cannot be limited to a notional date, ensuring full compensation for delayed refunds.
The Orissa High Court upheld eviction of a married son and daughter-in-law from their mother’s self-acquired house, ruling they have no legal right to stay against her wishes. Justice A.C. Behera dismissed their second appeal, affirming earlier courts’ eviction orders.
The Orissa High Court held Section 161 allows only apparent error correction, mandating reasoned scrutiny of records and materials. A Division Bench of Harish Tandon and Murahari Sri Raman faulted authorities for ignoring ITC reconciliations, quashing the rejection infirm.
