Guwahati Court February 1986 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.
Pabitra Patowari Vs. District Judge, Kamrup and anr.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Feb-19-1986
1. Mr. Durlav Chandra Mahanta, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, submits that he has instruction not to press this application and accordingly he does not press it. 2. In the result the petition is dismissed as not pressed. The stay order stands vacated. There will be no order as to costs. 3. However, we feel that some observations are necessary in respect of arrangements of refreshment stalls in Court compounds within the State of Assam. The first notification brought to our notice dealing with the manner of allowing refreshment stalls in Court compounds, in the Government Circular No. 4B dated 9th Feb., 1928 issued by the Public Works Department to all Commissioners of Divisions, District and Sessions Judges, and Deputy Commissioners in Assam, which reads as follows : 'It has been brought to the notice of Government that there is no uniformity of practice as regards the leasing of sites for stalls in Court compounds. From the reports obtained, it appears th...
Raja Bhairabendra Narayan Bhup Vs. Collector of Goalpara at Dhubri
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Feb-18-1986
Lahiri, J. 1. Caveat Litigants --Litigants Beware Thou shalt suffer for thy sin! The respondent was happy as the tiny appeal pended before this Court. He was never up and doing, did not ask for expeditioushearing of the appeal Under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act dispensing the formalities of the preparation of the paper book nor did he pray for early hearing. Now the respondent is bound to suffer under any circumstances, no matter whether the appeal is allowed or dismissed. Now, 'Judicial Justice' has struck him in view of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in Bhag Singh v. Union Territory of Chandigarh, AIR 1985 SC 1576, the respondent is to pay enhanced solatium @ 30% of the market value and redoubled interest @ 15% per annum in terms of the provisions contained in the Land Acquisition (Amendment) Act, 1984. So, the delay is bound to enburden the respondent but the ultimate sufferers are the little Indians, as the respondent shall pay from the people's exchequer! Insof...
Shri Nalini Ranjan Sirkar Vs. the Superintendent of Taxes and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Feb-10-1986
K. Lahiri, J.1. We propose to dispose of the writ petitions by a common' order as they involve common questions of law and fact.2. The core question in the writ petitions :Whether egg, live poultry and dressed poultry are 'meat' within the meaning of item 11 of Schedule III to the Assam Sales Tax Act, 1947, as amended ?3. The relevant facts necessary for disposal of the petitions :At all relevant times the petitioner was a 'registered dealer' under the Assam Sales Tax Act, 1947, for short 'the Act' and registered army contractor for supply of food-stuff to the armed forces in the region on contract basis. The contracts in question were for supply of 'food-stuff' including potato, fish, vegetable, eggs and poultry. The Superintendent of Taxes assessed the petitioner to sales tax on poultry and eggs for the period ending 31st March, 1967, 30th September, 1967, and 31st March, 1968, by his orders dated 15th September, 1967, 21st February, 1968, and 18th August, 1969, respectively. In al...
Assam Rifles and anr. Vs. Smt. Hemada Hazarika and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Feb-04-1986
Lahiri, J. 1. We have heard the appeals together with the, consent of the learned Counsel for the parties as they involve common questions of law and facts. We proceed to dispose of the same immediately after hearing learned Counsel for both the parties bearing in mind the message, amounting to command of the Supreme Court, in State of Haryana v. Darshana Devi, AIR 1979 SC 855 directing us to dispose of such cases as expeditiously as possible. 2. The appellants have preferred the appeals against a common award made by the Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Sibsagar, Jorhat in M.A.C.T. Case Nos. 30/73, 31/73 and 32/73 awarding compensation to the respondents. 3. The relevant facts are that on 19-9-73 at about 8 a.m. a transport vehicle belonging to the Assam Rifles knocked down and ploughed over Punai, Chowkidar of Kaliapani M.E. School and two young students of the school, Haren and Deben, who were going by the extreme left side of the road. After dashing the three pedestrians,...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›