Guwahati Court June 1991 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.
Assam State Transport Corporation and anr. Vs. NalIn Ranjan Aditya
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Jun-20-1991
S.K. Phukan, J. 1. This revision petition is directed against the judgment and order dated 22.6.1989 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Cachar, at Silchar in Misc. Appeal Nos. 19, 23 to 27 of 1981. By the said order the learned court set aside the order of the learned Additional Deputy Commissioner, Cachar passed under the Pay-ment of Wages Act, 1936, for short, 'the Act'. 2. The facts briefly stated are as follows: The opposite party herein was a permanent L.D. Assistant in the establishment of State Transport Corporation, petitioner herein and he submitted his resignation on 1.11.1971 with a notice making effective the said resignation from 1.12.1971. He also prayed that he may be released immediately. His resignation was held up for various reasons and ultimately on 31.1.1976 it was accepted with retrospective effect from 1.7.1973. The said employee claimed that he was not paid his wages from August, 1972 to December, 1975 except for the period from December, 1972 to...
Shri Pranab Jyoti Gogoi Vs. the State of Assam and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Jun-18-1991
Manisana, J.1. In this application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for a writ of habeas corpus, the petitioner Pranab Jyoti Gogoi has challenged the arrest and detention of his brother Dhruba Jyoti Gogoi alias Bobby as illegal.2. In the application made on 18-3-91, the case of the petitioner, in brief, is that on 17-3-91 at about 8.00 a.m. army personnel arrested Dhruba Jyoti at Doom Dooma. The information about the arrest was given to the petitioner at about 12.00 noon on the same day. The family members including the petitioner made inquiries about Dhruba Jyoti but is whereabouts were unknown. Dhruba Jyoti had been suffering from epilepsy. He had an inclination to have epileptic fit when he passed sleepless night, or if he was tortured physically or mentally.3. On 20-3-91. Shri N. Dutta, learned counsel for the petitioner, drew the attention of the Court that Dhruba Jyoti died while in the custody of the army authority and the dead body of Dhruba Jyoti was handed over...
Pannalal Ganguly Vs. the State of Tripura and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Jun-13-1991
1. In the course of the hearing of the writ petition, Mr. Bhattacharjee, learned counsel for the petitioner, argued that the two affidavits, namely, one bearing tender No. 8389/4 to oppose the writ petition and the other bearing No. 8387/2 which is a counter to the rejoinder filed by the petitioner, filed on 25-5-91 on behalf of respondents 1, 2 and 5 are to be rejected for lack of proper verification. The writ petition was heard at some length. On 11-6-91, the day to which the hearing of the writ petition was adjourned, Shri G.C. Chakraborty, learned counsel for the respondents 1, 2 and 5, prayed that he may be allowed to file an application for leave to reverify the two affidavits. The prayer was allowed. Accordingly, a petition was filed alongwith two proposed supplementary affidavits with an alternative prayer to allow them to file fresh affidavits.2. Paragraph 26 of the affidavit bearing tender No. 8389/4 runs: '26. That the statements made in this counter-affidavit in paras -- ...
Shri Subhas Chandra Agarwalla Vs. Smt. Golabi Devi Agarwalla
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Jun-06-1991
B.P. Saraf, J. 1. The petitioner is aggrieved by an order dated 4-11-89 of the Assistant District Judge, Tinsukia allowing the plaintiff to be examined on commission after two witnesses on her behalf had already been examined. The contention of the petitioner is that under 0. 18, R. 3A of the Code of Civil Procedure ('C.P.C.'), the court is required to record its reasons for permitting the plaintiff to appear as her own witness at a later stage, which has not been done in the instant case. The real grievance of the petitioner, therefore, relates to non-compliance of the requirements to Order 18, Rule 3A and not grant of permission for examination on commission.2. I have heard Mr. G. P. Bhomik, learned Counsel for the petitioner. Heard also Mr. D. N. Barua, learned Counsel for the opposite party-plaintiff. Mr. Barua submits that Rule 3A of Order 18 is directory, and as such, the order allowing the plaintiff to be examined on commission shall not be vitiated on the grounds of non-recor...
Shri Sampatmall JaIn Vs. the State of Assam
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Jun-06-1991
S.N. Phukan, J.1. By this common judgment and order I propose to dispose of two petitions filed under Section 401/482, Cr.P.C. read with Article 227 of the Constitution. The said petitions have been registered as Criminal Revisions Nos. 155 and 157 of 1991.2. Briefly stated the facts are as follows:--Facts of Criminal Revision No. 155 of 1991:This petition has been filed by the accused in connection with Goalpara Police Station Case No. 260 of 1990 (G.R. Case No. 764 of 1990) registered under Section 365/343, IPC read with Sections 3 and 4 of the Terrorists and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987 (for short the Act). It has been alleged that one son of the accused namely Nawartanmall had gone to Southern India on 24-11-90 in connection with his business trip and during his absence, on 30-11-90 State Police personnel went to the house of the petitioner and enquired about the above son of the petitioner and also made a search of the house, but nothing was recovered. Police did ...
Tinsukia Vastra Bhandar Vs. Assam Tea Corporation Ltd.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Jun-06-1991
Manisana, J. 1. The petitioner-firm has made this application for winding up of the respondent-company on the ground that the respondent-company is unable to pay its debts and that it is just and equitable that the company should be wound up. 2. Facts : The petitioner-firm carries on business, amongst others, of supply of woollen blankets, clothes, umbrellas, aprons, etc. (which I shall refer to as 'goods'). Pursuant to orders given by the respondent-company and/or its managers at the Jorhat office, the petitioner-firm sold goods on credit to the company on condition that the payment would be made within 30 to 60 days and that, in default of payment, the firm would be entitled to interest at the rate of 24% per annum on the bill amount. The petitioner-firm raised six bills bearing Nos. 33 to 38 amounting to Rs. 3,10,815 for supply of goods on different dates. Out of Rs. 3,10,815, the respondent-company made a part payment of Rs. 25,000 only. The firm sent reminders requesting the res...
Pujiba Tangkhul Vs. Ganguirung Kubuini and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Jun-06-1991
B.P. Saraf, J. 1. This appeal involves an important question relating to customary law of inheritance prevalent among the Kabui Tribe of Manipur. The precise question that falls for consideration is whether there prevails a custom among the Kubui Tribe whereby the daughters are excluded from inheriting immovable property left by their father even in the absence of sons and widow. 2. The appellant was the plaintiff in the suit which has given rise to this appeal. He was a purchaser of the suit land. His case was that the suit land belonged to one Kakchungai Kabui of Kakhulong village who died about four years before the institution of the suit leaving behind his daughter, defendant No. 1 (principal respondent herein). He also left behind two younger brothers who were pro forma defendants Nos. 2 and 3 in the suit. According to the plaintiff, the two pro forma defendants who were younger brothers of the deceased inherited the suit land on his death to the exclusion of his daughter accor...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›