Guwahati Court April 1963 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.
Shri Gauranga Chandra Deb Vs. Tripura Administration
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Apr-25-1963
T.N.R. Tirumalpad, J.C.1. The petitioner was convicted under Rule 6(a) of the Indian Passport Rules, 1950, read with Rule 3 and with Section 3 of the Indian Passport Act, 1920 and sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 55/- by the S. D. M., Sadar. His appeal to the Sessipns Judge was dismissed. Hence, he has come up in revision,2. The case against the petitioner was that he was a Pakistan national and that he entered India without any valid travel document between 16-9-59 and 20-11-59. He was arrested on 20-11-59 at Joynagar in Agartala by the Police. The defence of the petitioner was that he is an Indian national and that he did not enter India from Pakistan between 16-9-59 and 20-11-59, but that he has always been a resident of Joynagar in Agartala.3. Both the lower Courts were satisfied that the petitioner was a Pakistan national having his residence ' at New Chaudhury Para in Comilla in East Pakistan, that he had entered India through the Akhaura Check Post on 11-9-59 with a valid visa an...
Jadab Chandra Sarkar Vs. Sashi Mohan Deb Barma
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Apr-22-1963
T.N.R. Tirumalpad, J.C.1. This is an application in revision against the order of Shri W. U. Mulla, Magistrate first class dated 22-2-1961 summoning 23 persons including the petitioner under Section 204 Cr.P.C. to take their trial under Section 447, 427, 143 and 109, I. P. C.2. This case arose out of a complaint filed by the respondent on 184-1960 against 35 persons Including the petitioner under Section 147, 379 and 427 I.P.C. before the Subdivision Magistrate, Sadar. The S. D. M. forwarded the complaint to Shri H. R. Choudhury Magistrate first class for disposal. Shri H. R. Choudhury Magistrate took the sworn statement of the respondent under Section 200 Cr.P.C. on 194-1960 and he sent the complaint petition to the Circle Officer who is a Magistrate for enquiry and report. The Circle Officer appears to have submitted a report on 4-6-1960 which was against the complainant's case. Then the respondent appears to have moved the S. D. M. for having this case taken up along with certain o...
Chand Mia Vs. Khayernessa Bibi
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Apr-20-1963
T.N.R. Tirumalpad, J.C.1. The petitioner was convicted by the first class Magistrate Udaipur, under Sub-section 323/342, I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo six months R.I. under each section, the sentences to run concurrently. In appeal the convictions were confirmed but the sentences were reduced to two months R.I. under each count. Now the petitioner has come up in revision.2. The case against the petitioner was that on 5-7-59, he assaulted one Kharenessa (P. W. 1) of his village with his fist and caused simple injuries to her and then tied her hinds and feet with a rope and threw her into a paddy field from where she was subsequently rescued by her brother (P. W. 3). On these allegations, the petitioner was charged under Section 323/342,1. P. C. The defence of the petitioner was that on the date of the occurrence two goats of P. W. 2 had strayed into his field and damaged his crops and when he caught the goats and was taking them to be impounded, P. W. 1 .caught hold of the none with ...
JamiraddIn and ors. Vs. Debendra Chanara Saha
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Apr-17-1963
T.N.R. Tirumalpad, J.C.1. In this reference, the learned sessions Judge has recommended that We conviction of the petitioners by the First Class Magistrate, Udaipur, Under Section 3/9 IPC may be set aside.2. The case against them was that on 28-8-59, they dishonestly took away one Brita patrolman light belonging to the complainant from the shop of P.W. 2, where the complainant had temporarily kept it, A forage Under Section 403 IPC was framed against them. the defence of the petitioners was that the said patrolman lignin belonged to them, that sometime before the date of occurrence they had given the light of P. W. 2 for a function in his shop, that it appeared that the complainant had also given a patrolman light to P. W. 2, that there was a wrong exchange of the lights and the complainant had taken away the light belonging to the petitioners and had got his name inscribed on it, while the light belonging to the complainant was given to the petitioners and that all that the petitione...
D. C. Chaudhuri and Another Vs. Agricultural Income-tax Officer, Shill ...
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Apr-04-1963
MEHROTRA C.J. - These Civil Rules arise out of petitions filed under article 226 of the Constitution of India, and as a common question of law is raised, these are disposed of by one common judgment.Civil Rules Nos. 233, 234, 235 and 236 of 1961 arise out of petitions filed by Sri D. C. Chaudhuri and Sri S. C. Dutt against the Agricultural Income-tax Officer, Assam, and the State of Assam. The case of the petitioners is that they owned the Martycherra Tea Estate in the district of Cachar, which they purchased on the 1st January, 1948. On the 9th July, 1953, they sold the said garden, and during the period 1st January, 1948, and 9th July, 1953, the petitioners carried on the business of cultivation, manufacture and sale of black tea at the said Martycherra Tea Estate under a partnership. The two petitioners were the sole partners of the firm. The partnership firm was served with a notice under the Indian Income-tax Act by the Income-tax Officer and was assessed to income-tax for the as...
Sardarmal Khumchand Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Assam, Tripura and ...
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Apr-04-1963
MEHROTRA C.J. - These three rules arise out of the applications under section 66 of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 (hereinafter called "the Act"). The petitioners in the rules Nos. 1(M) and 2(M) of 1963 are the same. The petitioner in rule No. 3(M) of 1963 is different. The two rules Nos. 1 and 2 relate, however, to different periods. Rule No. 1 relates to the period 1958-59 and rule No. 2 relates to 1959-60. A common question is involved in these three cases and they can be disposed of by one judgment.The short point which requires consideration is whether section 67A of the Act applies to the present case and whether the applicants were entitled to the exclusion of the time which they required for obtaining the certified copies of the order passed by the Appellate Tribunal. The three assessees filed an appeal before the Appellate Tribunal which was rejected. The copy of the order is alleged to have been sent to the assessees under section 33(4) of the Act. Thereafter, app...
S. K. Dutta Vs. Member, Board of Agricultural Income-tax, Assam.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Apr-03-1963
MEHROTRA C.J. - The following questions of law have been referred to this court under section 28 (2) of the Assam Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1939 (Assam Act IX of 1939), hereinafter called "the Act" :"(1) Whether under the provisions of the Assam Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1939, the tax is paid by a company on behalf of its shareholders ?(2) Whether the shareholder of a company can claim refund of the agricultural income-tax paid by the company though the dividend in the hands of the shareholders is not agricultural income.(3) Whether for the purpose of determining the rate at which refund would be granted under rule 25A of the Assam Agricultural Income-tax Rules, 1939, it was illegal to take the total world income of the petitioner into account ?"The facts necessary for answering the questions are that the assessee was a shareholder of the tea companies known as Sarojini Tea Company (Private) Ltd. and Udalguri Tea Company (Private) Ltd. in Dibrugarh sub-divisi...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›