Guwahati Court January 1953 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.
Sabaru Ram Izardar Vs. the State of Assam and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Jan-30-1953
Ram Labhaya, Ag. C.J. 1. This order will cover the two Revenue Rules Nos. 45 and 46 of 1952 issued under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India. Both are directed against the settlement of Fisheries Nos. 49 to 52 of Barpeta Subdivision for the year 1952-53 alleged to have been made by the State of Assam with Respondent 3, Harendra Nath Das. The Subdivisional Officer of Barpeta auctioned at Barpeta the four registered fisheries Nos. 49 to 52 of the Barpeta Subdivision on 14-2-52. The petitioner was the highest bidder. He offered Rs. 28,125/- for the fisheries in question. At the close of the auction, the Subdivisional Officer passed the following order: 'Sold to the highest bidder Sabaru Ijardar, s/o late Chamria Khowa of Nagaon, Mauza: Barpeta, for Rs. 28,125/- (rupees twenty-eight thousands one hundred and twenty-five only). Sd/ B.M. Dam, S. D. Order 14-2-52'. The petitioner deposited Rs. 9375/- as security deposit with the S. D. O., Barpeta, who then referred the said s...
Dalbahadur Chetri and anr. Vs. the State
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Jan-30-1953
Deka, J.1. The two appellants Dal Bahadur Karka Chetri and his brother Bir Bahadur Karka Chetri were tried of the charge of murder with the aid of a jury with respect to the death ot one Dal Bahadur Thapa Chetri on the night of 19-5-51, or more precisely in the early hours of 20-5-51. The accused were committed for trial under Section 302, I. P. C. but the learned Sessions Judge, L. A. D. altered the charges to one under Section 302/34, I. P. C. and the jury having returned a unanimous verdict of guilty against both the accused persons, the learned Sessions Judge passed a sentence of transportation against each of the accused persons and the appeal was initially filed from, jail by the accused persons but at the final hearing Mr. S. K. Ghose appeared for the appellants.2. According to the prosecution, there was a 'Mel' or panchayat between the deceased Dal Bahadur Thapa Chetri and Bir Bahadur Kharka Chetri on the allegation that Dal Bahadur tried to entice away the wife of Bir Bahadu...
Mahboob Khan Vs. Deputy Commissioner and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Jan-21-1953
Deka, J. 1. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for a writ or writs of the nature of Mandamus and Prohibition on the five opposite parties of whom opposite party No. 1 is the Deputy Commissioner of Lakhimpur, No. 2 Municipal Board of Dibrugarh, No. 3 the present lessee, No. 4 an unsuccessful bidder and No. 5, the State of Assam. The petition is on behalf of one Mahboob Khan who claims to be the lessee of a municipal market within the municipality of Dibrugarh for the year 1952-53 and his allegation is that the Deputy Commissioner by an illegal order restrained him from obtaining the lease and the Government of Assam have affirmed that order. 2. The facts of the case are as follows: On 26-3-1952, the Chairman of the Dibrugarh Municipal Board with a sub-committee of the said Board put up to auction the settlement of the New Market for the year 1952-53 that is the right to collect tolls for the said period and Mahboob Khan was the highest bidder at the sai...
Jagat Ch. Paul and ors. Vs. Dhirendra Chandra Paul
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Jan-09-1953
Lakshmi Narain, J.C.1. The learned Sessions Judge, Agartala Shri P.R. Das Gupta forwarded the records of his Court's Criminal motion No. 84 of 1951 to this Court under Section 438, Cr.p.c. with no definite recommendation but it appears from his order dated 28.9.51 that he has come to the conclusion that the order in question passed by the Magistrate is illegal and wants it to be quashed. The learned Sessions Judge ought to have forwarded this reference on a prescribed form and In a proper manner.2. A point raised by the learned Counsel for the Opposite party who has appeared in this reference is that the aggrieved party ought to have recourse under Sub-section (4) of Section 144, Cr.P.C. and not by way of revision. That could because but if he has not availed himself of the remedy provided by Sub-section (4) above, it is no ground for refusing to interfere in revision.3. On a petition under Section 144, Cr.P.C. the learned Magistrate went to the spot and made local inspection and enqu...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›