Guwahati Court January 1997 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.
Sudhangshu Mohan Deb Vs. Smt. Niroda Sundari Dhupi Alias Das and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Jan-22-1997
N.G. Das, J.1. This application under Section 115 read with Section 151 of C.P.C. is directed against the order of learned Civil Judge, Senior Division No. 1, Agartala dated 13-1-1997.2. I have heard Mr. B. Das, the learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. S. Bhattacharjee, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents.3. Shorn of details, the facts relevant for disposal of this application are that the respondents obtained a decree against the present petitioner by virtue of the judgment passed by the first appellate Court setting aside the judgment and decree that was passed by the trial Court, namely, Civil Judge, Senior Division No. 1. Aggrieved, the present petitioner preferred a Second Appeal being Second Appeal No. 20/93. But that appeal was also dismissed by this High Court on 27-8-1996. The petitioner then submitted a review petition being Civil Review Petition No, 22 of 1996. But that was also dismissed on 27-11-1996.4. According to t...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. A.B.C. India Ltd.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Jan-16-1997
D.N. Baruah, J.1. In this reference under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short 'the Act'), the following question has been referred for opinion of this court :' Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the assessee is entitled to depreciation on flats and buildings which have not been transferred to the assessee by the previous owner by registered deeds of conveyance ?'2. The facts for the purpose of answering this question may be narrated as follows :3. The assessee is a limited company having transportation business and purchased flats and office premises on ownership basis at various places in India, i.e., at Bombay, Calcutta and Poona. However, there were no registered sale deeds in favour of the assessee with regard to those flats and office premises. The assessee claimed depreciation allowance under Section 32(1) of the Act. However, this was disallowed by the Assessing Officer, i.e., the Income-tax O...
Commissioner of Wealth-tax Vs. Dilip Kumar Singhania
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Jan-16-1997
D.N. Baruah, J. 1. In this reference under Section 27(1) of the Wealth-tax Act, 195 7 (for short, 'the Act'), the following three questions have been referred by the Tribunal for opinion of this court : ' (1) Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case and in view of provisions of the Appellate Tribunal Rules, the Tribunal did not err in law as well as in facts in accepting the valuation report of the assessee's valuer, which was not considered either by the Wealth-tax Officer or by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner ? (2) Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal did not err in law as well as in facts in not accepting the Departmental valuer's report valuing the property at Rs. 12,85,100 ? (3) Whether the Tribunal's order directing the Wealth-tax Officer to adopt the value as per the assessee's valuer's report, is not bad in law as the Tribunal had not given any reason or discussed anything in supporting the same and as such not sustainable ?' 2. T...
Assam Frontier Tea Industries Ltd. Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Taxes ...
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Jan-08-1997
D.N. Baruah, J. 1. This writ appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated August 19, 1996 (see ), passed by a learned single judge in Civil Rule No. 2303 of 1992 dismissing the writ petition. 2. For the purpose of disposal of this writ appeal, the facts may briefly be stated as under : The appellant is the writ petitioner in the civil rule. It is a public limited company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956, with its registered office at Talap in the District of Tinsukia, Assam. The company is engaged in the business of cultivation, manufacture and sale of tea. It owns as many as 18 tea estates in Assam. About 14,500 workers are employed in those tea estates for growing tea and manufacture thereof. At the relevant time, the company used to spend about Rs. 70,00,000 yearly in welfare activities such as running schools and hospitals, etc., in the State. In the relevant year, namely, assessment year 1984-85, the appellant-company made contributions of Rs. 2 crores each t...
Smt. Namita Paul Vs. Food Corporation of India and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Jan-07-1997
Khanna, C.J. 1. As prayed by the learned counsel for both the parties, this appeal has been taken up for final hearing and disposal at the admission stage. 2. This appeal has been filed against the judgment rendered by the learned single Judge in Civil Rule No. 518/96 (Agartala) dated 28-11-96. 3. We have heard Mr. A. K. Phukan, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/appellant, assisted by Mr. A. Lodh, and Mrs. A. Hazarika, learned counsel appearing for the respondents-1 to 4, assisted by Mr. T. J. Mahanta, Learned counsel appearing for the Food Corporation of India (respondent No. 1) has produced the entire original records pertaining to this case which have been perused by us. 4. The controversy in the present appeal centres round the question as to whether the contract which had been awarded in favour of the petitioner/appellant by the Food Corporation of India, in respect of that very contract, at a later point of time, part of the contract could be given to another contra...
Sirish Chandra Paul Vs. State of Tripura
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Jan-06-1997
N.G. Das, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 9th January, 1992 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Belonia in Sessions Trial No. 19(S.T/B) of 1989 whereby the learned Addl. Sessions Judge convicted the accused-appellant for commission of the offence Under Section 307 of IPC and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for six (6) years and also to pay a fine of Rs. 2000/- in default of which he is to suffer R.I. for a further period of two months.2. I have heard Mr. M.L. Roy, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant and Mr. S. Das, the learned Public Prosecutor, appearing on behalf of the State of Tripura.3. The facts of the case in brief are that on 19-1-86 A.D. at about 9.00/9.30 a.m. Slidhangshu Bhattacharjee (P.W. 8) along with Mukupda Paul (P.W.1) and Rajmohan Shil (P.W. 2) were proceeding towards Bathkhola bazar and as they went near the house of Bhabatosh Biswas (P.W. 7), the accused-appellant suddenly appeared be-fore Sudhagshu Bhatta...
Jagdish Prasad Saraogi and anr. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Jan-06-1997
D.N. Baruah, J. 1. By this application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners challenge the search and seizure effected in respect of the bank locker of the petitioners bearing No. 175 (Type-E) in Indraprastha Sahkari Bank Limited, Wazirpur Industrial Area, Delhi, and also the notices dated April 20, 1995, issued by the Income-tax Officer, Ward-II(2), Guwahati, purporting to draw up proceedings under Section 132(5) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short, 'the Act'), against the petitioners and pray for issuance of an appropriate writ or directions. 2. The facts for the purpose of disposal of this writ petition are : Both the petitioners are assessees under the Act and are assessed by the third respondent. The petitioners are also assessed under theWealth-tax Act by the Wealth-tax Officer, Ward-II(2), Guwahati. The petitioners have their permanent residence at Fancy Bazar, Guhawati, and have a temporary residence situated at BE-8, Salimar Bagh, Delhi. The peti...
Nirmal Dey and anr. Vs. State of Tripura and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Jan-06-1997
N.G. Das, J.1. This is an application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India by the petitioner Shri Nirmal Dey and Shri Bimal Kuri for issuance of the a writ directing the respondents to treat all the members of the Tripura Home Guards Organisation as regular employees holding civil post and also to allow all the members of the Tripura Home Guards Organsisation all benefits of services including pay and allowances of Police Officials of equivalent rank from the respective date of service of the individual employee.2. I have heard Mr. B. Das, the learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners and Mr. A. Chakraborty, the learned Advocate General appearing on behalf of the respondents.3. The case of the Petitioner No. 1 is that he entered into the service as a member of the Tripura Home Guards in 1965 with the designation of 'Guardsman' which is equivalent to the rank of Police Constable and the duties performed by him since his entry into the service are similar t...
Angshuman Das Gupta Vs. Jute Corporation of India Ltd. and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Jan-06-1997
N.G. Das, J.1. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the petitioner has prayed for quashing the impugned order dated January 12, 1994 issued by the Chairman-cum-Managing Director, the Jute Corporation of India Ltd. whereby the appointment of the petitioner as Junior Inspector Traineeship was ordered to be discontinued with immediate effect.2. I have heard Mr. A.M. Lodh, the learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. A. Chakraborty, the learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents.3. The petitioner's case, shortly put, is that he was appointed Trainee Junior Inspector by the respondents and accordingly he joined on September 14,1985 atBishramganj Sub-Centre at a monthly stipend of Rs. 400/- which was subsequently raised to Rs. 600/-. While discharging his duties as a Trainee Junior Inspector the petitioner was asked to sit for the written examination in the month of February, 1987 which was held for regular isation of...
Shyamal Bhattacharjee Vs. State of Tripura and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Jan-01-1997
N.G. Das, J. 1. By means of this application filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the petitioner who is Sub-Inspector of Police challenged the legality and validity of the order of Superintendent of Police (West) dated July 22, 1993 contained in Annexure-13 whereby the petitioner was dismissed from service with effect from the afternoon of July 23, 1993 and also the order of the appellate authority dated December 30, 1993 contained in Annexure-15. affirming the aforesaid order of dismissal. 2. I have heard Mr. S. Deb, the learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. U.B. Sana, learned Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the respondents. 3. The case of the petitioner, shortly put, is that while serving as O.C., Ganganagar Police Station under South Tripura District he was suddenly transferred to the Office of the Superintendent of Police, West Tripura Dist. and thereafter a departmental proceeding was started in respect of two charges ...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›