Guwahati Court December 1952 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Gedeng Sut and anr. Vs. the State
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Dec-22-1952
Deka, J. 1. These are two applications for issue of certificates under Article 134(1)(c) of the Constitution of India to the effect that the cases are fit ones for appeal to the Supreme Court. The two applications are on behalf of two accused persons who were jointly tried in the Court of Session by the Sessions Judge, U. A. D. with the help of Jury. The jury returned a verdict of guilty under Section 304, Part I, read with Section 34, I. P. C. against both the accused persons. The learned Judge, however, differed with the jury as to the verdict of guilty against accused Kandura and he accordingly made a reference under Section 307 (1), Criminal P. C. to the High Court.The learned Judge expressed his view in the following words:'In view of the facts and circumstances stated above, I am of opinion that the verdict of the jury finding accused Kandura Sut guilty under Section 304, Part I, I. P. C. read with Section 34, I. P. C., cannot be sustained and should be reversed. I am also of o...
Ghanashyam Das and ors. Vs. the State of Assam and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Dec-19-1952
Ram Labhaya, Ag. C.J. 1. This order will cover C. Rules Nos. 69, 75, 85 and 40 of 1952. The question which cans for decision at this stage is common to all the four cases.2. Rules were issued in all the four cases under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India. The petitions on which these Rules were issued are directed in each case against an order of the Excise Minister of the Government of Assam. Cases Nos. 69 and 75 arise out of the same order dated 29-5-52. The order purports to have been passed by Mr. J.J. Nichols Roy, Minister in charge of Excise, Assam, (the Excise Appellate Authority, Assam). The order in the other two cases, namely Nos. 85 and 40 of 1952 also purport to have been passed by the same Minister and in the same capacity.3. On behalf of the State of Assam, the opposite party in all the four cases, a preliminary objection has been raised. It is contended that the petitions on which the Rules have been issued are not properly constituted, inasmuch as all ne...
Mahim Chandra Datta Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Dec-19-1952
Ram Labhaya, Ag. C.J.1. This is an application for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of India. Leave is sought under the provisions contained in Article 133, Clause (1) (c), Constitution of India read with Section 109(c), Civil P. C., and also under Article 132 (1) of the Constitution. 2. The order of this Court sought to be appealed from was passed in an appeal from the order of the learned Subordinate Judge, U. A. D, at Silchar in Misc. case No. 5 of 1950. The learned Subordinate Judge had disallowed certain objections raised by the judgment-debtor (the Union of India) to the execution of the decree. The judgment-debtor appealed to this Court. This appeal succeeded, but not on the basis of the objections that were raised to the execution of the decree in the Court of the learned Subordinate Judge. During the pendency of the appeal in this Court, the Indian Independence Pakistan Courts (Pending Proceedings) Ordinance, 1951 (6 of 1951) was promulgated. Before the appeal could be h...
Chunilal Kanhaiyalall Vs. the Chairman, Palashbari Town Committee
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Dec-16-1952
Ram Labhaya, Ag. C.J. 1. This is a petition under Article 226, Constitution of India for writs of the nature of certiorari, mandamus and prohibition. The facts giving rise to this petition are as follows:2. Messrs. Chunilal Kanhaiyalall, petitioners, owned 3 holdings in Palasbari town. We are concerned in this case with holding No. 60 in Ward No. III. The Town Committee of Palashbari constituted under Section 328, Assam Municipal Act of 1923 passed a resolution in an ordinary meeting of the committee on 26-10-1949, authorising the Chairman and Dr. Padmeswar, Goswami to revise the valuation of holdings and assessments. On 25-2-1950, the valuators submitted their valuation list and the assessment was revised. The Chairman of the Board then caused a notice dated 27-2-1950 to be published notifying the revised valuation and inviting objections to that valuation. According to the revised valuation, the annual value of the petitioner's holding No. 60, Ward No. III, was determined at Rs. 390...
Channing Sangma Vs. Singsan Sangma
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Dec-04-1952
Deka, J. 1. This is a petition of revision filed under Rule 35 of the Rules for the Administration of Justice and Police in the Garo Hills District. The petitioner is one Changing Sangma and he moves this Court against the order of the Deputy Commissioner of Garo Hills passed in Revenue Appeal No.7 of 1951-52, dated 29-3-52. 2. The case for the petitioner is that he was illegally removed from the Nokmaship of Menonggiri Akhing which was shared with his wife Ronggat who is now dead. The opposite party Singsan Sangma filed a petition before the Extra Assistant Commissioner at Tura on 31-8-50 that in view of the fact that Channing was not looking after his wife Ronggat who was ill, the petitioner and the Maharis or clansmen had released Channing from Akhym (that is the obligation to take a second wife to be provided by the clansmen) and the Maharis did not want him to continue as Nokma. The case had a chequered career and I need not refer to the interim stages. Mt. Ronggat was in the me...
Md. Lutfulla Saheb Vs. Gauhati Bank Ltd. and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Dec-02-1952
Ram Labhaya, J. 1. This is an appeal fromthe judgment and decree of the Second Additional District Judge, U. A. D. dated 24-7-1950 by which plaintiff's claim for a sum of Rs. 8418/9/3 was decreed, jointly and severally against defendants 1 to 3 and against the assets of the late Sadananda Singh in the hands of defendants 4 and 5 with, costs. Defendant 1 alone has appealed. 2. The plaintiff the Gauhati Bank Ltd., Golaghat Branch sued for the recovery of Rs. 8489-9-3 on the balance of accounts. The case presented by the plaintiff was that defendants 1 to 3 and Sada Singh, deceased of Golaghat town carried on partnership business in the name and style of M/s. V. Allies and Company in Golaghat. The firm engaged itself in contracts from the military and the Public Works Department. Sadananda Singh, deceased was the Managing partner. The firm needed money to finance its business and through Sadananda Singh applied to the Bank for accommodation. The application for accommodation was put in ...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›