Guwahati Court April 1983 Judgments

Wealth-tax Officer Vs. Pabitra Kr. Barua

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Guwahati

Reported in: (1983)5ITD420(Gau.)

1. All these ten matters involve a common dispute and are, therefore, disposed of by this single order.2. The facts leading to this dispute are that the assessee was owner of one-fifth share of land measuring 95 bighas, 4 kathas, 11 lechas which was acquired by the Government for setting up railway marshalling yard on 31-10-1960. Some compensation was ordered to be paid regarding which the assessee agitated and ultimately on 22-11-1977, the arbitrators awarded a sum of Rs. 22,37,874. According to the WTO, the assessee's interest in this awarded amount came to Rs. 4,47,574. He, accordingly, included this amount in the assessee's net wealth on the relevant valuation dates, i.e., 31-3-1967, 31-3-1968, 31-3-1969, 31-3-1970 and 31-3-1971.3. The assessee filed appeals before the AAC who reduced the addition by Rs. 1,79,124 on the ground that the compensation money awarded as the cost of the land was only Rs. 13,42,320. The balance was on account of 15 per cent solatium amounting to Rs. 2,01...

Tajamul Ali Laskar Vs. Abdul Rahman and ors.

Court: Guwahati

K. Lahiri, J.1. This is a purported appeal from an order of acquittal passed by the Sub-divisional Judicial Magistrate, Hailakandi in G.R. Case No. 940 of 1974 acquitting 12 accused persons of the charges under Section 143 read with Section 379 of the I.P.C.2. About 10 years ago a paddy theft was allegedly committed by 12 accused persons. Since 1974 these 12 persons were taken care of by the police men, and had the rigours and mortifications of attending court on innumerable occasions. Perhaps the persons around the place have forgotten and wiped out from their memory the 'tiny incident'. However the first informant desires to disinter the case from the graveyard and to get a conviction of those 12 accused, upon setting aside the order of acquittal. It is true that the present appellant had filed a complaint in court but the learned Magistrate found that it was a fit case for police investigation and directed the police to investigate the matter. Accordingly, the police treated the co...

Miss Sanjenbam Mamata Devi Vs. Vice-chancellor, Manipur University and ...

Court: Guwahati

Lahiri. J.1. While exercising power under Article 226 of the Constitution the High Court ought to be slow and circumspect in interfering with the internal academic matters of a University. However, where a grave injustice is caused by a University whereby a young student yearning for knowledge learning and enlightenment is refused admission into the University classes illegally and arbitrarily, without any authority of law, this court will surely intervene and restore Justice in exercise of its jurisdiction and uphold the Constitution and the law.2. Long before our independence, Tagore thought of freedom in an deal society, and expressed in his inimitable verve :'Where the mind is without fear and the head is held high: Where knowledge is freeInto that Heaven of Freedom. my Father, Let my country awake.'3. Our Constitution also underscores the imperative need for free education. We have not been able to provide 'free higher education' so there exists limitations, restrictions and cons...

Md. Saifur Rahman Vs. State of Assam and ors.

Court: Guwahati

Lahiri, J.1. The appeal and the connected Civil Revision are directed against the judgment and order dt. 6-9-82 passed by the Assistant District Judge No. 1, Nowgong, Assam in Title Appeal No. 19 of 1978. By the impugned order the learned Judge-(I) permitted the appellants-defendants to produce 'additional evidence'; (2) remanded the suit to the Court of the first instance for recording the evidence with a direction to dispose of the suit on the basis of the additional evidence, and (3) set aside the judgment anddecree obtained by the plaintiff. In short, the learned judge allowed the defendants to produce additional evidence purporting to act under Order 41, Rule 27(aa) of the Civil P. C, 'the Code' for short. However, instead of recording the additional evidence himself learned Judge directed the Court of the first instance to take such evidence, and did not act under Order 41, Rule 28 of 'the Code, without assigning any reason whatsoever. Learned Judge has set aside the hard earned...

The State Vs. D.N. Bhuyan

Court: Guwahati

K. Lahiri, J. 1. 'It is sometimes more important to emphasise the of obvious than to elucidate the obscure' lamented Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes. The answers to the questions posed in these cases are obvious but it has become necessary to elucidate the obvious answers. The primary question is the precise period of limitation for preferring an appeal from an order of acquittal in a case investigated by the Delhi Special Police Establishment for short 'the Delhi Police', constituted under the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946. The obvious answer to this question is 90 days from the date of the order. However, we have been invited to give a reasoned decision for reaching the conclusion. The subsidiary question is whether the appellants-petitioners have made out a case for extension of the prescribed period of limitation under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963.2. These are applications under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 for extension of the prescribed period, of...

Hari Charan Kalita Vs. District Magistrate and ors.

Court: Guwahati

B.L. Hansaria, J. 1. It is said that one swallow does not ordinarily make a summer. So also one prejudicial act cannot ordinarily form the basis of a preventive detention order. But there are exceptions to both the rules. In the present petition we are called upon to see as to what those exceptions are; and when can detention order be founded on a solitary instance of prejudicial activity.2. Before adverting to this aspect, it may be stated that an order of detention is essentially a precautionary measure and is not a punishing device. In law there is a distinction between 'prevention detention' and 'punitive detention.' This was highlighted by the Supreme Court in Francis Coralie AIR 1981 SC 746 : 1981 Cri LJ 306, A.K. Roy v. Union of India : 1982CriLJ340 , where it has also said that 'whatever smacks of punishment has to be scrupulously avoided in matters of preventive detention '(See para 74)3. It is true that the precautionary measure of detaining a person is based on a prognosis...

Anupam Chakraborty Vs. State of Assam

Court: Guwahati

T.N. Singh, J.1. This case is concerned with a small Incident of burglary but it tarries a big burden of a fundamental question. What is the ambit of powers and jurisdiction of a criminal Court to add as an ace used any person to stand trial for an offence for which he is not charge-sheeted by the police? The question is indeed fundamental in the sense that criminal Courts exist, to try offenders for the protection of society. While powers and jurisdiction of the courts are circurnsribed by the provisions of the Code the question is how those provisions which have a bearing on this fundamental duty of the courts are to be interpreted.2. On 6-2-79 an information was lodged by the proprietor of Hind Pharmacy, Jorhat, with the officer-in-charge of Jorhat P. S. in which it was stated that there was a burglary in his shop during the preceding night. On the basis of this FIR the police made investigation and submitted charge-sheet dt 10-4-79 under Sections 457/380/411 IPC in the court of Ch...

Mustt. Kitabjan Bibi and ors. Vs. Ramlal Durgadutta

Court: Guwahati

S.M. Ali, J. 1. Can be Executing Court go behind the decree in a case where the decretal land cannot be located in terms of the decree and order delivery of possession of a different land whose three boundaries coincide with the three boundaries of the land decreed in favour of the plaintiff-opp? 2. The question has to be determined in this revision. What happened is that the plaintiff-Opp. instituted a suit being Title Suit No. 20/64 in the Court of Assistant District Judge, Nowgong. Subsequently the suit was transferred to the Court of the District Judge where it was re-numbered as Title Suit No. 5/67. The suit was for declaration of title and recovery of possession of 3 kathas of land out of IB. 18L. covered by Dag No. 958 under Patta No. 775 of Nowgong town and the suit was against late Keramat Ali predecessor in interest of the petitioners. It was decreed on 9-6-70 and the decree was put into execution in Title Execution Case No. 1/7Q in the Court of the Assistant District Judge...

F. Rodingliana (In Jail) Vs. State of Mizoram

Court: Guwahati

S.M. Ali, J.1. These two appeals arise from the same judgment conviction and sentence passed against the appellant by the Addl. Deputy Commissioner. Aizawl in case No. G.R. 37/82 under Section 25(1) (a)/27 of the Arms Act convicting the accused-appellant to 3 years R.I. Under Section 25(11(a) of the Arms Act and also R.I. for 4 years Under Section 27 of the Arms Act, the sentences on both the counts running consecutively.2. On 14-1-82 the officer-in-charae of Aizawl Police Station received a written report from Saisima of 1 MAP to the effect that on the night of 13-1-82 the accused-appellant was found possessing one M-20 Pistol and 150 rounds of ammunitions and 2 magazines without any valid licence or permit. On this information investigation was started by the police and on completion of the investigation charge-sheet was submitted against him. At the trial the accused-appellant was charged under those sections of the Arms Act. The accused-appellant denied the allegations. In the tr...

Bikash Narayan Sarma Vs. State of Assam and ors.

Court: Guwahati

B.L. Hansaria, J. 1. 'Law deals with the facts of life. In law, as in life, there are no invariable absolutes. Neither life nor law can be reduced to mere but despotic formulae'. These observations had fallen from Chinnappa Reddy, J. in Ummu Saleema v. B.B. Gujaral : [1981]3SCR647 , while dealing with the question as to whether there was any reasonable delay in considering the representations of the detenu. It had been observed earlier that the occasional observations made by the Court that each day's delay must be explained were meant to emphasize the expedition required in such a matter, and not that it is a magical formula, the slightest breach of which must result in release of the detenu. Thinking on the same wave length, may we say that though the procedural safeguards must be made available to a detenu to the greatest extent, at the same time the inner object and intent behind the framing of such laws which are sanctioned by the Constitution itself cannot be allowed to be tota...