Guwahati Court March 1960 Judgments

Hamid Ali and anr. Vs. the State

Court: Guwahati

T.N.R. Tirumalpad, J.C.1. The Appellant Hamid Ali was convicted by the Sessions Judge in Sessions Trial No. 13 of 1959 under Section 489B and 489C I.P.C. and sentenced to 3 years' R, I. under each count. The appellant Manindra Chandra Saha was convicted in the same trial under Section 489B read with Section 511 I.P.C. and under Section 489C I.P.C. and sentenced to 1% years' R. I. under each count, all the sentences to run concurrently. I am dealing with the two appeals in this common judgment.2. The prosecution case against them was as follows: On 1-11-1958 Manindra Chandra Saha went to the shop of Jatindra Mohan Saha (P. W. 2) at about 4 P. M. and asked for change for a 10 rupee currency note, At that time Manindra Kishore Paul (P. W. 1) was also sitting in the shop. He became suspicious of the genuineness of the note from its colour. Both he and Jatindra examined the note and decided that it was counterfeit. On being questioned, Manindra Chandra Saha said that he had sold some must...

Jagneswar Sen Gupta Vs. Gopal Chandra Saha

Court: Guwahati

T.N.R. Tirumalpad, J.C.1. This is an appeal filed on be-half of the Agartala Municipality by its Food Inspector against the acquittal of the respondent Gopal Chandra Saha by the Sessions Judge in Criminal Appeal No. 70 of 1958. The respondent was convicted in Criminal Case No. 217 of 1958 by the first class Magistrate, Agartala under Section 16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 and sentenced to a fine of Rs. 51/-. But on appeal he was acquitted by the Sessions Judge.2. The facts may be briefly stated:- The respondent and one Govinda Chandra Saha were the employees of a Firm called Srikishna Stores Carrying on whole-sale and retail business in mustard oil in Agartala. On 16-4-1958 the appellant, the Food Inspector of the Agartala Municipality on receipt of information that the two persons were filling up mustard oil in the godown of the Firm from a big barrel of mustard oil into smaller tins having the embossed marks of the manufacturers of various brands of mustard oil....

Panbari Tea Co. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Assam, Tripura an ...

Court: Guwahati

MEHROTRA, J. - The following question of law has been referred to us by Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Calcutta Bench, Calcutta, under section 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act (hereinafter called "the Act" for opinion :"Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and upon the construction of the terms of the lease dated March 3, 1950, the sum of Rs. 11,250 received by the assessee during the year of account is revenue or capital receipt ?"The assessment year is 1952-53 and the relevant accounting year is the financial year 1951-52. The assessee is a public limited company owning two large tea estates named "Panbari Tea Estate" and "Barchola Tea Estate" in the district of Oarrang. The tea leaves grown in both these estates were processed in the factory called the "Panbari Tea Factory" belonging to the assessee. By a deed of lease dated March 31, 1950, both the tea estates including the factory and all oppurtenances there...

Panbari Tea Co. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Assam, Tripura an ...

Court: Guwahati

Reported in: [1961]42ITR672(Gauhati)

MEHROTRA, J. - The following question of law has been referred to us by Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Calcutta Bench, Calcutta, under section 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act (hereinafter called 'the Act' for opinion :'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and upon the construction of the terms of the lease dated March 3, 1950, the sum of Rs. 11,250 received by the assessee during the year of account is revenue or capital receipt ?'The assessment year is 1952-53 and the relevant accounting year is the financial year 1951-52. The assessee is a public limited company owning two large tea estates named 'Panbari Tea Estate' and 'Barchola Tea Estate' in the district of Oarrang. The tea leaves grown in both these estates were processed in the factory called the 'Panbari Tea Factory' belonging to the assessee. By a deed of lease dated March 31, 1950, both the tea estates including the factory and all oppurtenances thereto were demised to one Messrs. Hiralal Ramdas for a...

Yumlembam Mohan Singh and ors. Vs. Thangjam Golap Singh and anr.

Court: Guwahati

Reported in: 1961CriLJ787

1. This is a revision petition against the conviction and sentence of the petitioners by the First Class Magistrate in Criminal Case No. 170 of 1957 under Section 379 I.P.C. and against the dismissal of the appeal and the confirmation of the conviction and sentence by the Sessions Judge in Criminal Appeal No. 63 of 1959. The petitioners 1 and 2 were each sentenced to a fine of Rs. 100/-and in default 3 months' R. I. while petitioners 3 and 4 were each sentenced to a fine of Rs. 50/-and in default to 2 months' R. I. each. In giving the higher punishment of fine of Rs. 100/- to petitioners 1 and 2, the Magistrate has remarked that there was an aggravating circumstances against them, namely, that this was a repetition of their earlier offence, in 1956 in respect of the same land.2. The case against them was that on 9-11-1957, the petitioners with the help of other harvested paddy worth Rs. 250/- from the complainant's land during his absence and thereby committed an offence under Section ...

Yumlembam Mohan Singh and ors. Vs. Thangjam Golap Singh and anr.

Court: Guwahati

Reported in: 1961CriLJ787

ORDERT.N.R. Tirumalpad, J.1. This is a revision petition against the conviction and sentence of the petitioners by the First Class Magistrate in Criminal Case No. 170 of 1957 under Section 379 I.P.C. and against the dismissal of the appeal and the confirmation of the conviction and sentence by the Sessions Judge in Criminal Appeal No. 63 of 1959. The petitioners 1 and 2 were each sentenced to a fine of Rs. 100/-and in default 3 months' R. I. while petitioners 3 and 4 were each sentenced to a fine of Rs. 50/-and in default to 2 months' R. I. each. In giving the higher punishment of fine of Rs. 100/- to petitioners 1 and 2, the Magistrate has remarked that there was an aggravating circumstances against them, namely, that this was a repetition of their earlier offence, in 1956 in respect of the same land.2. The case against them was that on 9-11-1957, the petitioners with the help of other harvested paddy worth Rs. 250/- from the complainant's land during his absence and thereby committed...

Haobam Nongyai Singh Vs. Thousiaojam Budha Singh

Court: Guwahati

T.N.R. Tirumalpad, J.C.1. This is a petition under Sections 439 and 561-A, Cr. P.C. for quashing the proceedings made by the First Class Magistrate, Bishenpur, in Criminal Miscellaneous Case No. 86 of 1959.2. The petitioner herein purchased 3 buffaloes from one Oinam Tomba Singh on 27-5-1959 under Ext. B/2. On 9-7-1959, he made an oral complaint to the O/C., Bishenpur Police Station stating that he had kept the buffaloes in charge of Oinam Tomba Singh after purchase, that on 6-7-1959 he demanded the buffaloes from the said Tomba Singly that on receiving an' evasive answer he got suspicious and he made a search for the buffaloes and found two of them in the residence of one Ibopisak Singh, who on enquiry stated that the buffaloes were kept with him by the respondent Budha Singh and that on questioning, Budha Singh told the petitioner that the two buffaloes were sold to him by Oinam Tomba Singh. He therefore prayed for action against the said Tomba Singh.3. The Police registered the cas...