Guwahati Court May 1996 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.
Paulienmang Singson and ors. Vs. State of Manipur and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: May-03-1996
N.G. Das, J.1. This is an application for condonation of the delay in preferring the review petition which was filed on 10-5-1995 to review the judgment that was passed on 25-5-1994 in Civil Rule No. 99 of 19S6.2. I have heard Mr. Kh. Chonjohn, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. Gogonchandra, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents.3. The facts material for disposal of this petition are that some time in the year 1979 A.D. the Government of Manipur took over possession of land measuring 50 hectars belonging to one Lunkhopa now represented by his legal representatives, namely, Shri Paulienmang Singson and two others. Since the Government did not pay any compensation, the petitioners filed an application; on 22-9-1981 to the Collector for payment of the compensation money. But the Collector disposed of that application by making an observation that the petitioners would not be entitled to get any sort of compensation until and unless the...
Susanta Kumar Choudhury and anr. Vs. Birendra Kumar Deb Roy and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: May-02-1996
N. Surjamani Singh, J. 1. It is admitted by the learned counsel of both the parties that the appellant No. 2 Dr. P.K. Choudhury and the respondents Nos. 2 and 4, namely, Shri Nirmalendu Ghosh Choudhury and Shri Mahendra Ghosh Choudhury and the pro-forma respondent No. II Shri Swandip Kumar Choudhury had died. From the report of the Process Surver submitted on 23-7-1990; it has been revealed that the notices upon the respondents Nos. 2 and 4 could not be served as the said respondents were no loger alive at the relevant time when the process server visited the places where the respondents Nos. 2& 4, resided. Now, the sole question issues arises as to whether this appeal is abated or not. Before entering into the merits on this particular issue, it will be partinent to know the facts of this case. The facts of the case in a short compass are as follows : 2. The present appellant No. l Shri Susanta Kumar Choudhury and the appellant No. 2 Dr. Pradip Kumar Choudhury (now deceased-- filed ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›