Guwahati Court January 1991 Judgments

Rameshwar Prasad Goenka Vs. Assistant Commissioner of

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Guwahati

Reported in: (1991)37ITD112(Gau.)

1. In these appeals, the assessee has raised similar grounds of appeal.It is the appeal by the assessee that the assessments made by the assessing officer and as confirmed by the DCWT(A) was not justified as the same was bad in law and on facts. It is submitted that the authorities concerned should have accepted the claim of the assessee for freezing the value of the property at Shillong under Section 1(4) of the Act. It is also the appeal by the assessee that the benefit under Section 1(4) should be allowed for freezing the value for the year under consideration on the basis of the value determined for 31-3 -1971 and that the assessee had not submitted and accepted the valuation as determined by the department.2. We have heard both the sides at length and we have gone through the orders of the authorities below for our consideration. In the assessment order, it is seen that there is a property at Police Bazar, Shillong (residence) which value was shown at Rs. 1,85,000. The value was ...

Hemendra Prasad Barooah and anr. Vs. Bahadur Tea Co. P. Ltd.

Court: Guwahati

Manisana, J. 1. This is an application under Section 156 of the Companies Act, 1956, to rectify the register of members of the respondent-company on refusal by the company to enter the names of the petitioners as members or shareholders. Facts : Mrs. Premada Barooah, during her lifetime, was a shareholder or member of the respondent-company, the Bahudur Tea Company Pvt. Ltd. She died on March 31, 1978, leaving a will appointing her son-in-law, Mr. Hemendra Prasad Barooah, and her daughter, Mrs. Rosa Kamte, as the executors. In the will, her shares in the respondent-company were also included. The will had been probated. Thereafter, the executors made an application to the respondent-company for registering the fact of their becoming members of the company as executors or legal representatives of the deceased member, Premada, but the respondent-company refused to register their membership on the ground that a son-in-law or executor cannot be a member of the company under the memorandu...

Assam State Transport Corporation Vs. Sri Dhirendra Chandra Das Choudh ...

Court: Guwahati

Manisana, J.1. This is an appeal from an award made on 23.12.81 by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal Meghalaya in MAC Case No. 18 of 1975.2. On 28.1.68 on account of negligence of the driver of Truck No. ASX 1750 belonging to the Assam and Meghalaya States Road Transport Corporation, the truck collided with a Jeep bearing Registration mark ASA 5263 by which Smt Mrinalini Paul was travelling. In that accident Radius and Ulna of Smt Mrinalini Paul were broken. The Tribunal made an award of Rs. 50,000/-. Being aggrieved by the award, the Assam State Transport Corporation has filed this appeal.3. The only question which arises for consideration in this appeal is whether the liability would devolve on the Assam State Transport Corporation or on the Meghalaya State Transport Corporation.4. Mr. P.C. Deka, the learned Counsel for the appellant has submitted that the liability would devolve on the Meghalaya State Transport Corporation and not on the Assam State Transport Corporation. In supp...

Musst. Jarina Khatun Vs. State of Assam

Court: Guwahati

S. Haque, J. 1. Accused Azim Ali and Jarina Khatun had been convicted Under Sections 302 & 201 readwith Section 34 of the IPC vide judgment dated 26-4-1986 passed by the Sessions Judge, Dhubri in Sessions Case No. 7(D)/ 1985 arising out of G.R. Case No. 857/84.2. Md. Azizur Rahman father-in-law of deceased Nasimuddin lodged the FIR on 27th July, 1984 alleging that his daughter Musstt. Jarina Khatun and Azim Ali murdered Nasimuddin and buried the dead body inside the house. Exhibit 1 was the FIR. During investigation the dead body was disentered from inside the house of Jarina Khatun on 27-7-1984 and post mortem examination was held. Dr. Abdul Mazid (P.W. 12) held post mortem examination. Sixteen wounds on the body of the deceased over forehead, left and right nostril, right Mandibular region, right cheek, right ear, right plura, right shoulder and left eye; and 6 penetrating injuries placed on the sternum upper third, epigastrium region, left limber region, right hypochondrium and bel...

Shillong Municipal Board Vs. Shri Bhagirath Yadav

Court: Guwahati

Manisana, J. 1. This is an appeal from an order of acquittal of the Chief Judicial Magistrate Shillong in CR Case No. 396(S) of 1979.2. Facts of the case, in brief, are thus. On 13-8-79, the Chief Executive Officer of the Shillong Municipal Board made a complaint to the Chief Judicial Magistrate Shillong stating that the accused Shri Bhagirath Yadav, the proprietor of Yadav Mistanna Bhandar at Shillong Bara Bazar, has made an extension of 12ft x 4ft in area to the ground floor without obtaining permission from the Municipal Board. The notice under Section 177(1) of the Meghalaya Municipality Act, for short 'the Act', had been served on the accused directing him to demolish the unauthorised construction, but he failed to do so. The Chief Judicial Magistrate acquitted the accused of the charge, without entering into the merits of the case, on the ground that the prosecution was instituted without the order or consent of the Board as is provided under Section 324 of the Act. Hence this a...

Deepanjan Guha Vs. Rajesh Gupta and ors.

Court: Guwahati

S.N. Phukan, J.1. By order dated 21-11-89, the learned single Judge of this Court on perusal of the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court dated 26-9-89 passed in Civil Original Petition (Contempt) No. 75/88, was of the opinion that there was prima facie ease in respect of the present petition for initiating proceeding for contempt of Court and, accordingly, notice was issued. Parties have appeared and filed counter-affidavit.2. I have heard Mr. S.K. Sen, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. D.N. Chaudhury, learned counsel for the opposite parties.3. For the purpose of the present petition the facts of the case may he briefly stated as follows :The plaintiff is the sole proprietor of a business firm known as M/s. Khubchand & Sons, Music Department and is engaged in selling various types of goods including Audio and Video products of the renowned manufacturers of the Country including the product sold under the trade name ONIDA. According to the plaintiff-petitioner, the de...

Rakesh Goyal Vs. Nanak Chandra Agarwal and ors.

Court: Guwahati

Manisana, J.1. In this revision petition, the petitioner has prayed for quashing the orders dated 4.10.90 and 30.10.90 passed by the Judicial Magistrate of the first class at Gauhati in Case No. 1580 C of 1990.2. The matter relates to the custody of a truck bearing No. AMA 7594. The learned Magistrate by an order dated 4.10.90 directed that the vehicle shall be kept in the custody of the Office-in-charge, Basistha Police Station. On 30.10.90, the learned Magistrate passed another order directing the Officer-in-charge, Basistha Police Station to give custody of the vehicle to the registered owner. Hence this petition.3. Mr. G.N. Sahewala, the learned Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner purchased the vehicle from the respondent-1 with delivery of possession, and the vehicle was not seized by the Police from the possession of the respondent-1. Mr. J.M. Choudhury, the learned Counsel for the respondent-1 has opposed the contentions. In support of their respective ...