Guwahati Court February 1994 Judgments

Chuba Temsu Ao and ors. Vs. Nangponger and ors.

Court: Guwahati

H.K. Sema, J. 1. This revision is directed against the Judgment and decree dated 28-1-1992 passed by the learned addl. Deputy Commissioner (J) Mokokchung in Civil Appeal No. 7/90. 2. I have heard Mr. B.N. Sarma, learned counsel for the revisionist as well as Mr. Temjen, counsel for the respondents. 3. One of the main grounds taken in this revision petition is ground 'm' reads as under; '(m) For that the suit is bad for nonjoinder of necessary party namely the State of Nagaland and therefore no executable order could be made in the present case.' 4. It is contended by Mr. B.N. Sarma that the suit is not maintainable for non-joinder of necessary party namely; the State of Nagaland in as much as the land in dispute is under the perpetual occupation of the State of Nagaland. In this connection, Mr. Sarma referred to the plaint filed by the Respondent/Plaintiff particularly paras 5 and 6 of the plaint. In para 5, it has been stated that in the year 1890, the British Administrative troops ...

Nagatangkhui Vs. State of Nagaland and ors.

Court: Guwahati

Reported in: 1995CriLJ347

1. The petitioner herein is the father of one Thotmaya aged about 19 years who died while in custody in Sub-Jail, Dimapur on 13-9-92.2. The petitioner resides with his family at Diphupar, Dimapur. The deceased was the eldest son of the petitioner.3. The said son of the petitioner was missing from his home since 30-8-92. The petitioner tried to find out the whereabouts of the son. It was on 2-9-92, the petitioner came to know that his son was lodged in Sub-Jail, Dimapur. After obtaining permission from a local Magistrate at Dimapur, the petitioner met his Son on 2-9-92. It, is averred in this petition that on 2-9-92 when the petitioner met his son in Sub-Jail, Dimapur he was in good health and the son did not complain of any problem. The petitioner was however, requested by his son to see that he was bailed out. He was also informed by his son that no ground of detention was disclosed to him. On 12-9-92 at about 11 A.M. the petitioner went to Sub-Jail to give his son some clothing, soap...

Shri P.N. Bhattacharjee Vs. Shri Kamal Bhattacharjee

Court: Guwahati

N.G. Das, J.1. The petitioner Shri P.N. Bhattacharjee who is Income-tax Officer of Ward No. 1, Agartala, West Tripura has approached this court under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. seeking relief for quashing the order of discharge of the accused dated 13-3-1991 passed by Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Agartala in Case No. C.R. 301 of 1989 and the revisional order dated 31-3-1992 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, west Tripura, Agartala affirming the order of discharge.2. The facts relevant to the determination of the points at issue are few and simple. On 25-8-1989 the present-petitioner who is the Income-tax Officer of Ward No. 1, Agartala, West Tripura filed a complaint in the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, West Tripura, Agartala against the respondent Shri Kamal Bhattacharjee alleging, inter alia, that the respondent who is an assessee of the Income-tax under P.A. No. 10-009-PV-7987 filed a false account of statement for the assessment year 1982-83 to evade Inc...

Nagatangkhui Vs. State of Nagaland and ors.

Court: Guwahati

Reported in: 1995CriLJ347

ORDERW.A. Shishak, J.1. The petitioner herein is the father of one Thotmaya aged about 19 years who died while in custody in Sub-Jail, Dimapur on 13-9-92.2. The petitioner resides with his family at Diphupar, Dimapur. The deceased was the eldest son of the petitioner.3. The said son of the petitioner was missing from his home since 30-8-92. The petitioner tried to find out the whereabouts of the son. It was on 2-9-92, the petitioner came to know that his son was lodged in Sub-Jail, Dimapur. After obtaining permission from a local Magistrate at Dimapur, the petitioner met his Son on 2-9-92. It, is averred in this petition that on 2-9-92 when the petitioner met his son in Sub-Jail, Dimapur he was in good health and the son did not complain of any problem. The petitioner was however, requested by his son to see that he was bailed out. He was also informed by his son that no ground of detention was disclosed to him. On 12-9-92 at about 11 A.M. the petitioner went to Sub-Jail to give his so...

Umesh Chandra Paul Vs. Suresh Chandra Paul and anr.

Court: Guwahati

N.G. Das, J. 1. By means of the present application under Section 115 of C.P.C. the order dated 10-7-1990 passed by the learned Subordinate Judge, North Tripura, Kailashhar accepting the report of the Survey Commissioner in a suit, namely T.S. 4 of 1982 has been challenged. 2. In order to appreciate the controversy between the parties, a brief narration of facts relating to this petition is necessary. On 23-3-1982 one Suresh Chandra Paul filed the aforesaid suit, namely, T.S. 4/1982 for declaration of his jote right on the suit land described in the schedule attached to the plaint, a decree for perpetual injunction restraining the defendants from entering into the suit land and some other incidental reliefs against 29 defendants. 3. Some of the defendants contested the suit by filing written statement. The petitioner is one of them. On 23-5-1987 the plaintiff filed an application under Order 26 Rule 9 of C.P.C. for local investigation of the suit land. After hearing learned counsel o...

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Nandalal Parshuram

Court: Guwahati

M.K. Sharma, J. 1. This is an application under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, against the order dated February 7, 1991, passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Gauhati Bench, Gauhati, in R. A. No. 63(G) of 1990 for the assessment year 1984-85 rejecting the reference application under Section 256(1) filed by the Revenue. The Revenue seeks to refer to this court for its opinion the following questions stated to be questions of law : '(1) Whether the Tribunal did not err in facts as well as in law in holding that the tractors are not road transport vehicles ? (2) Whether the Tribunal did not err in fact as well as in law in allowing investment allowance on tractors ?' 2. We have heard Mr. D.K. Talukdar, learned standing counsel for the Revenue, and also Mr. G.N. Sahewalla, learned counsel for the assessee. 3. We have been taken through the questions of law sought to be referred to this court and also the orders passed by the learned Tribunal and the Inspecting Assista...

Sunanda Ram Deka Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax

Court: Guwahati

Dr. M.K. Sharma, J.1. This is an application under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, filed by the assessee against the order dated November 22, 1990, passed by the Tribunal, Gauhati Bench, Gauhati, in Reference Application No. 76/(Gau) of 1990 in Income-tax Appeal No 240/ (Gau) of 1988 for the assessment year 1981-82 rejecting the reference application under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, filed by the assessee. In this application, the assessee seeks to refer the following two questions, stated to be questions of law, for the opinion of this court : '(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the revised return filed by the assessee on March 31, 1984, was not a revised return referring and/ or relying on the decision of the Gauhati High Court in the case of F.C. Agarwal v. CIT ?(2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that t...

Kamal Kumar Saharia Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax

Court: Guwahati

M.K. Sharma, J. 1. In this reference at the instance of the assessee, the following question has been referred by the Tribunal under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for the opinion of this court for the assessment year 1982-83 : ' Has not the learned Appellate Tribunal committed an error on solely basing its judgment on book adjustment entries made on March 31, 1982 after the close of the previous year to find out the financial position of that year, when the payments were actually and really made on or after April 2, 1982 on the encashment of the cheque as found by the lower appellate authority and thereby confirming the addition of Rs. 3,43,014 without any corroborative evidence in the hands of the Department that the payments were made on or before March 31, 1982 ?'2. The facts in this case are that the Assessing Officer added to the income of the assessee a sum of Rs. 3,43,014 'being the amount of cash brought into the books of the assessee as received from the execut...

Saurav Diesel Sales and Service Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax

Court: Guwahati

M.K. Sharma, J.1. This is an application under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short, 'the Act'), filed by the assessee against the order dated January 20, 1993, passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Gauhati Bench, in Income-tax Reference No. 163/(Gau) of 1991 arising out of J. T. No. 152/(Gau) of 1990 for the assessment year 1985-86 rejecting the reference application filed by the assessee under Section 256(1) of the Act. The assessee seeks to refer the following four questions, said to be questions of law, for the opinion of this court : '1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in reversing the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) and in restoring the order of the Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax (Assessment), Special Range-I, Gauhati, imposing penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, in the sum of Rs. 2,76,658 ?2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the ca...

United India Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Shri L.N. Tamuly and ors.

Court: Guwahati

P.K. Deb, J.1. This appeal under Section 30(1)(aa) of the workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 has been directed against the judgment and award dated 19.6.89 passed by the learned Commissioner, Workmen's Compensation, Kamrup, Guwahati in W.C. No. 2/88.2. The crux of dispute as canvassed in this appeal is whether the Insurance Company the appellant is liable to pay interest and penalty as contemplated under Section 4A of the Workmen's Compensation Act alongwith the statutory compensation as per Section 3 of the same Act. The facts of the case are very simple. The Truck Ho. AMU-2783 belonged to the owner Shri Balen Chandra Kallta met with a disastrous accident while the wooden bridge over the river Khorkhari broke down when the loaded truck was passing over the same and in the said accident Pradip Kumar Talukdar who was serving as handy-man in the truck died in the accident which occurred on 7.3.86. When the owner and the Insurance Company did not settle with the claim of compensation of S...