Guwahati Court August 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.
Dhanbahadur Ghorti Vs. the State of Assam
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Aug-21-1952
Deka, J. 1. This is a Rule obtained on an application by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India against an order of the Deputy Commissioner, dated 5-10-51 and notice was served on the Deputy Commissioner, Garo Hills to show cause why the order petitioned against should not be set aside or why such further order or orders should not be passed as to this Court may seem fit and proper. 2. A preliminary objection has been raised as to the competence of this application by the learned Senior Government Advocate under Rule 9 of Chapter V-A of the Assam High Court Rules published under the Assam Gazette Notification of 25th July, 1950. The Rules under Chapter V-A were framed for covering applications for Directions, Orders or Writs (other than writs in the nature of Habeas Corpus) under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, and R. 9 thereof runs as follows : 'Where an application has been rejected, it shall not be competent for the applicant to make a second app...
Samar Roy Ghatwar and anr. Vs. Dinanath and anr.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Aug-21-1952
Ram Labhaya, Ag. C.J. 1. Plaintiffs sued for a declaration of their right and title to and khas possession of the land measuring about 12 B. 4 K. 13 G. covering about one-third of the land of patta no. 59. The suit was dismissed by the trial Court and the decree of the trial Court was affirmed on appeal. They have appealed to this Court.2. The land of the entire patta No. 59 belonged to plaintiffs' father Lal Chand. Their case was that their father was in exclusive possession of the land till his death which occurred in Magh 1352 B. S. and plaintiffs came into possession after him. They were dispossessed of the land in dispute by the defendants in April 1946. Though the land sued for is said to be a plot covering about one-third of the patta land, it has not been defined in the plaint by boundaries or in any other manner. The defendants purchased the land in dispute from one Saharai, son of Joy Chand by a registered deed of sale on 10-2-1936. A mutation was attested in their favour on...
Himatsingka Timber Ltd. Vs. Kumudini Dutta
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Aug-21-1952
Ram Labhaya, J. 1. This is a petition for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court under Article 133 of the Constitution of India read with Section 109, Civil P. C. from the decree of this court in Second Appeal No. 73 of 1950. 2. The suit out of which this petition arises was for ejectment of the company (M/s. Himat-singka Timber Ltd.) from the land in suit measuring about 14 K. 15 D. The land wasadmittedly situated within the limits of Dhubri Municipality. Before instituting the suit the plaintiff had sent a notice to the defendants requiring them to deliver possession within 15days from the date of the receipt of the notice. The defendants did not deliver possession. They resisted the suit. The main ground of defence was that the notice of ejectment was not validas the tenancy was governed by the provisions contained in the Goalpara Tenancy Act. The notice was admittedly valid if the Transfer of Property Act applied. 3. The learned Munsiff found that the Goal-para Tenancy Act had no a...
The Tripura Modern Bank Ltd. Vs. Sushil Chandra Dutta and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Aug-21-1952
Ram Labhaya, J. 1. This is an appeal from the judgment and decree of the learned Additional Subordinate Judge, Upper Assam Districts by which plaintiff's claim was decreed in part with proportionate costs. The decree was against defendant 1 personally and against the Estate of Girija Kanta Roy, deceased, in the hands of defendants 2, 5 and 6. The suit was dismissed against defendants 3, 4 and 7 daughters of Girija Kanta Boy. Plaintiff has appealed to this Court. 2. The suit was for recovery of a sum of Rs. 15,306/11/-. The claim included interest and incidental charges. The case for the plaintiff bank (The Tripura Modern Bank Ltd., Dibrugarh) was that Sushil Chandra Dutta, defendant 1 and Girija Kanta Eoy, deceased predecessor-in-interest of defendants 2 to 7, had separate personal accounts with the plaintiff bank. Both needed money for their business as forest contractors and asked for accommodation on an overdraft basis. The joint overdraft account was opened on their request. On ...
Senairam Doongarmall Vs. the State of Assam
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Aug-19-1952
Deka, J. 1. This is a reference under Section 28 (2), Assam Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1939, (Assam Act 9 of 1939) for a decision on the question of law framed as follows : 'Whether the compensation received from the Military authorities for loss of crop, etc., is agricultural incomewithin the meaning of Section 2 (a) (2) of the Assam Agricultural Income-tax Act.' 2. The relevant facts will appear from the statement of facts made by the Member, Assam Board of Agricultural Income-tax: 'Messrs. Senairam Doongarmall (hereinafter referred to as the assessee) are the proprietors of Sewpur Tea Estate in Lakhimpur District. The factory and some other buildings of this Tea Estate were requisitioned by the Military authorities in 1942 under the Defence of India Rules. As a result of this, the assessee was prevented from performing any agricultural operation as well as from manufacturing any tea during the year 1943-44. The Military authorities however, paid to the assessee a sum of Rs. 60,0...
Mt. Dukhuni Bibi and anr. Vs. Khaliloor Rahman
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Aug-14-1952
Deka, J. 1. This is an appeal from the order of the Settlement Officer, dated 11-5-51 in Dispute Case No. 179 (ka) relating to old patta No. 148 and new patta No. 337 in the town of Gauhati in connexion with the recent Town Settlement. This-appeal is on behalf of two persons--Mt. Dukhuni Bibi and Mt. Hedayatanessa whose objections were-overruled by the learned Settlement Officer. Mt. Hedayatannessa's claim was with respect to 14 lechas of land in Dag No. 937/938 and Mt. Dukhuni Bibi's claim was with respect to 1K 4L in some other dags covered by the same patta basing their claims on alleged gifts from Seikh Sukhial and Mt. Sarubandi. 2. It does not appear from the order of the learned Settlement Officer that any witness was examined with regard to the possession of the disputed plots but the parties filed documents showing their respective title and claim to possession. The original patta stood in the name of Khaliloor Rahman and Abubakar Ayaz who were represented as second party in...
Union of India (Uoi), Representing Assam (Now N.E.) Railway Vs. Indu B ...
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Aug-08-1952
Ram Labhaya, J. 1. This Rule was issued on the petition of the Union of India--representing Assam (now North Eastern) Railway. It called on the Opposite Party to show cause why the delay in filing the appeal be not condoned as prayed for by the petitioner. 2. The appeal in this case was put in on 26-4-1952. It ought to have been put in on 10-4-1952 at the latest. This Court was closed for Easter from nth to 25th April (both the days inclusive). 3. The petition for condonation of delay is supported by an affidavit of the clerk of the learned Government Advocate. The explanation for delay given in the petition is that the learned Government Advocate was under the impression that the appeal could have been filed on the 26th April after the Easter Vacation. This mistaken impression was created by date of application for the copy given in the certified copies of the judgment and the decree supplied to him. The date mentioned in the documents, it is alleged, could be read as 27th February...
Himangshu Sekhar Purkayastha Vs. the State of Assam Represented by the ...
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Aug-07-1952
Deka, J. 1. This is an appeal under Section 147 of the Assam Land and Revenue Regulation challenging the order of the Deputy Commissioner, Nowgong, dated 11-12-51, whereby he ruled out an objection raised by the appellant to the realisation of a certain amount from him as arrears of land revenue on a requisition made by the Divisional Forest Officer, Nowgong. 2. The facts leading to this appeal put shortly are as follows: The appellant entered into a certain contract for supply of bamboos to the M. E. S. Camp at Nowgong and submitted a bill for Rs. 6,240/- but before the bill reached the M. E. S. authorities, the appellant received by way of accommodation Rs. 3,200/-from the Divisional Forest Officer, Nowgong, by executing an indemnity bond on 22-12-45 the relevant portion of which runs as follows: 'I do hereby declare that I shall refund to the Divisional Forest Officer, Nowgong Forest Division if called upon by him to do so Rs. 3,200/- (Rupees three thousand and two hundred only) ...
Atul Chandra and anr. Vs. the State of Tripura
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Aug-07-1952
Lakshmi Narain, J.C.1. On a motion filed by the two accused Atul Chandra Gautam and Manindra Chandra Dev Varma, the learned Sessions Judge, Tripura has referred the case under Section 438, Cr.P.C. with recommendation that proceedings against the accused in case No. 77 Chhang of 1950 pending in the Court of Sri S.C. Kar, Magistrate Khowai, be quashed on the ground that the Magistrate could not proceed with the case under Section 161, I.P.C. without proper sanction as required by Section 6 of the Prevention of Corruption Act of 1947 (Act II of 1947).2. I have gone through the record of the case as also the explanation given by the Magistrate.3. The learned Sessions Judge has made the following observation in recommending this motion:The petitioners were being charged under Section 161, I.P.C., i.e., for taking illegal gratification. The offence is alleged to have been committed on 16.7.1950. Now, by virtue of Part C States (Laws) Act (Act I of 1950) read with the Merged States (Laws) Ac...
Ram Narayan Nandalal Vs. the State of Assam
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Aug-06-1952
Ram Labhaya, J. 1. This is a reference under Section 32 (3) of the Assam Sales Tax Act 1947 from the Commissioner of Taxes, Assam. 2. The assessees were registered dealers under the Assam Sales Tax Act. In their return they claimed exemption from sales tax on their turnover from cloth of the value of Rs. 2,77,024 under item 16 of Schedule III of the Assam Sales Tax Act. This amount represented the sale proceeds of cloth sold in pieces (Thans) of 20 to 30 yards. But the quality of the entire cloth was such that the price of a unit of six yards was less than Rs. 10/-. The deduction claimed was not allowed by the Superintendent of Taxes. The Assistant Commissioner of Taxes agreed with the Superintendent and dismissed the appeal. The assessee's second appeal to the Commissioner of Taxes met with no better fate. The view of the taxing authorities was that the price per yard calculated on the basis of Rs. 10 for six yards was not the only criterion for determining the availability or oth...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »