Guwahati Court September 1963 Judgments

Thangdawla Lushai and anr. Vs. Assistant Collector, Central Excise and ...

Court: Guwahati

T.N.R. Tirumalpad, J.C.1. All the 3 petitioners were convicted under Section 167(81) of the Sea Customs Act, under Section 23(1A) of the foreign Exchange Regulation Act and under Section 7(3) of the Land customs Act by the Additional District Magistrate in a separate cases and sentenced to 18 months' R.I., one year's R.I. and 3 months' R.I. respectively. The petitioners in Criminal Revision Cases Nos. So and 37 of 1902, were in addition convicted under Section 5 of the imports and Exports (Control) Act and sentenced to 3 months' K.I. each. The learned Magistrate directed that the Sentences should run consecutively. In the appeals filed by them, the learned Additional Sessions Judge confirmed the convictions. But reduced the sentences of each of the petitioners under Section 167(81) of the Sea Customs Act, to 6 month's R.I., under Section 23 (1A) of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act also to 6 months' K.I, and under Section 7 of the Land Customs Act to one month's R.I.In respect of th...

Arcuttipore Tea Estate Vs. Its Workmen and ors.

Court: Guwahati

G. Mehrotra, C.J.1. This rule arises out of a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution by which the award given by the presiding officer, labour court, Assam, is assailed.2. The facts are that two persons, Rampabitra Robidas and Bhukla Rikiason, were employed in the Arcuttipore Tea Estate owned and possessed by Arcuttipore Tea Company, Ltd., of Cossipore, District Cachar. On 23 March 1957 some workers were involved in a riot and it is alleged that the manager was assaulted by these persons. On the basis of the conduct of these workers on 23 March 1957 the two workers who have been named above along with some others were dismissed by the management. A criminal case was started against these persons and the two persons, Rampabitra Robidas and Bhukla Rikiason, were acquitted. The union took up the case of these two persons and reference was made to the labour court for adjudication on the following points:(1) Whether the management of Arouttipore Tea Estate are justified in dismiss...

Obe Mia and ors. Vs. Thokchom Ahanjao Singh and anr.

Court: Guwahati

T.N.R. Tirumalpad, J.C.1. This is a reference made by the Sessions Judge, against the order of the S. D. M. I. E. T. in a Section 145 proceeding. The first party who is the respondent herein moved the Magistrate for taking action under Section 145 Criminal Procedure Code stating that the original second party, who is the first petitioner herein interfered with his possession of one pair of land in patter No. 54/226-I.E.T. The land was also described by boundaries in the petition. The Magistrate sent it for a Police report and the Police reported that there was dispute about the land which was likely to create a breach of the peace, as both the parties were claiming to be in possession of the land, the first party claiming it as in patter No. 54/226 while the second party was claiming it as part of patter No. 54/471. The learned Magistrate issued a preliminary order on 22-8-1962 stating that there is dispute regarding one pair of land under patter No. 54/471 and that there was likeliho...

Obe Mia and ors. Vs. Thokchom Ahanjao Singh and anr.

Court: Guwahati

Reported in: 1964CriLJ99

ORDERT.N.R. Tirumalpad, J.C.1. This is a reference made by the Sessions Judge, against the order of the S. D. M. I. E. T. in a Section 145 proceeding. The first party who is the respondent herein moved the Magistrate for taking action under Section 145 Criminal Procedure Code stating that the original second party, who is the first petitioner herein interfered with his possession of one pair of land in patter No. 54/226-I.E.T. The land was also described by boundaries in the petition. The Magistrate sent it for a Police report and the Police reported that there was dispute about the land which was likely to create a breach of the peace, as both the parties were claiming to be in possession of the land, the first party claiming it as in patter No. 54/226 while the second party was claiming it as part of patter No. 54/471. The learned Magistrate issued a preliminary order on 22-8-1962 stating that there is dispute regarding one pair of land under patter No. 54/471 and that there was like...