Guwahati Court July 1973 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.
Swarnalata Dutta Barua and anr. Vs. National Transport India Pvt. Ltd. ...
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Jul-20-1973
Sarma, J. 1. By this judgment we propose to dispose of two appeals under Section 110-D of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (hereinafter called 'the Act'), namely Misc. Appeal (F) 37 and Misc. Appeal (F) 38 of 1968, arising out of Motor Accident Claims Cases Nos. 99 and 100, respectively, of 1966. which were disposed of by a common judgment dated 6-6-1968 by the Member of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal. Noweong. 2. The above two claims cases arose out of the same accident in which six persons travelling in a bus bearing No. ASA 3482 belonging to M/s. National Transport (India) Pvt. Ltd. (respondent No. 1) were killed, the bus being knocked off by the engine of a running train while crossing the railway lines at Noonmati Railway level crossing. The bus was engaged at that time by the B. O. C. (Pipe Line) Ltd. for transporting some of its employees residing in Gauhati town to and from their residence during the lunch hour and all the six victims were such employees. 3. It may be mentio...
Attaur Rahman Vs. the State of Assam
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Jul-18-1973
D.M. Sen, J.1. This is a petition under Section 439, Criminal Procedure Code, directed against a judgment and order passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Cachar, affirming a conviction under Section 457, Indian Penal Code and a sentence of two months' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 50/- in default of rigorous imprisonment for 15 days, passed by the learned S. D. M. (J.), Hailakandi. 2. Mr. Laskar, the learned Counsel for the petitioner, submits that the conviction of the accused petitioner is legally untenable. He has taken me through the part of the evidence; I, however, find that the evidence given by Kamalai, P. W. 2, can be the foundation for a legal conviction. In an application under Section 439, Criminal P. C., the revisional Court is not required, nor is it within its competence, to reappreciate the evidence on record. It can only interfere, if there be a flagrant miscarriage of justice, in the sense that the conviction is against some law or that there is no evidenc...
J.L. Roy Vs. Nepal Chandra Saha
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Jul-02-1973
P.K. Goswami, C.J.1. This appeal by a special leave at the instance of the Food Inspector-cum-Urban Health Officer, Karimganj Municipality. Karimganj is directed against a judgment of acquittal passed by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate (J.), Karimgani in case under Section 16(1)(b) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act. 1954, briefly the Act.2. The prosecution case is that the Food Inspector with witnesses visited the shop of the accused, who is a partner of a firm, Messrs. Bhudai Nepal Chandra Lalit Mohan Saha and on suspicion that there was adulterated flour inside the shop, asked the accused to give sample of 600 grams of flour from one of the bags which were found in the shop. The accused refused to supply the sample. This happened on 25th November. 1970. Being unsuccessful that way. he made a written report (Exhibit 2) to the Chairman of the Municipal Board, Karimgani. on the following day and requested to accord sanction for prosecution of the accused under Section 16(1)(b) ...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›