Guwahati Court May 1974 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.
Abdul Latif Vs. Amanat Ali Choudhary
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: May-20-1974
B.N. Sarma, J.1. This Rule was obtained by the petitioner Abdul Latif against the order of Shri K. C. Das, Magistrate First Class (E), Gauhati dated 12-1-1972 passed in Misc. Case No. 337 of 1971 under Section 107, Cr.P.C. requiring him to execute an interim bond for keeping the peace under Section 117(3) of the Cr.P.C. The petitioner filed a revision petition against this order before the Sessions Judge at Gauhati and this having proved abortive he came to this Court and obtained a Rule on 7-1-1973. The impugned order of the Magistrate came to be passed in the following circumstances.2. On 4-6-1971 the opposite party Shri Amanat Ali Chowdhury filed a petition before the Additional District Magistrate (E) . Gauhati praying for taking action against the petitioner and 4 others under Section 107, Cri.P.C., alleging apprehension of serious breach of the peace from them in the matter of repairing a house said to belong to the opposite party standing on his land which was said to have been...
Lomdhar Tanti Vs. Manager, Murmuria Tea Estate and anr.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: May-02-1974
D.M. Sen, J.1. This is an application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India by the workman-petitioner against the order of the learned Presiding Officer, Labour Count, approving under Section 33(2)(b) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, hereinafter called the 'Act' the order of dismissal passed by the management on 3-9-1966.2. The charge against the workman was (vide Annexure B p. 17) that he had built a pucca structure in between two labour quarters without permission and that when he was ordered in writing to dismantle the said unauthorised construction on or before 10-8-1966, he failed to do so, despite sufficient time and opportunity having been given to him. Accordingly, the workman was charged with willful disobedience of superior officer's lawful and reasonable orders, which amounted to a gross misconduct within the meaning of Clause 10(a)(1) of the Standing Order. Clause 10(a)(1) reads as under:10(a)(1). Willful insubordination or disobedience, whether alone or in c...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›