Guwahati Court May 1999 Judgments

Yumnam Saratchandra Singh Vs. State of Manipur and ors.

Court: Guwahati

1. I have heard Mr. N. Kerani Singh learned senior counsel for the petitioner as well as Mrs. Bldyamani Devi, learned Government advocate appearing for the State respondents. I have also considered the records of the case. 2. The petitioner's case in brief is that after passing Class-VIII(eight) examination he left Churachand High School, Imphal on 30.4.1956. According to School admission register, his date of birth is 5.11.1945. He entered Govt. service as a school teacher and worked as Head Pandit in the Bashikhong L.P. School. In the annual confidential report (Annexure-A/2) dated. 31.12.1969 his date of birth was recorded as 5.11.1945. Also in the employees' salary certificate dated 20.10.1988 (Annexure-A/3) his date of retirement is recorded as on 1.1.2003 treating the date of birth as 5.11.1945. Then all on a sudden without prior notice and information, the respondent No. 3, Director of Education issued the order (Annexure-A/4) dated 9.12.1994. The following is the full text of...

Smt. Bina Rani Banik Vs. Pradip Kr. Banik

Court: Guwahati

J.N. Sarma, J.1. This appeal arises out of a matrimonial proceeding. The wife is the appellant. A Suit being Title Suit (D) No. 13 of 1993 was filed before the learned District Judge at Nowgong and the learned District Judge by judgment and decree dated 7-7-1994 granted a decree of divorce.2. I have heard Smt. K. Deka, learned Advocate for the appellant and Smt. A. Hazarika, learned Advocate for the Respondent. The parties were married on 9-7-1985 (sic). Out of this wed-lock, a child was born on 25-1-1986. But the said child died on 25-3-1987. The respondent is an employee of the Railway and he is a Junior Clerk under Railway, This application of divorce has been filed on the ground of cruelty Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 provides three grounds for dissolution by a decree of divorce and Section 13(1)(ia) provides that a decree of divorce may be granted where the either party after celebration of marriage treated the petitioner with cruelty. That the Clauses (ia) and (ib)...

Md. Ashan Ali Vs. Musstt. Junagar Begum

Court: Guwahati

Reported in: 1999CriLJ4214

1. Head Mr. D.C. Mahanta, learned counsel for the petitioner ad Mr. S. Ali, learned counsel for the respondents.2. The petitioner Ashan Ali was directed to pay maintenance to his wife and son vide order dated 24-4-79 by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kamrup, Guwahati in case No. 29/78. The petitioner paid the maintenance in compliance of the said order. Thereafter on 23-3-96 petitioner filed an application claiming exemption from paying maintenance to his son Merjul Ali on the ground that the said son has attained majority and vide order dated 30-6-97 passed in F.C. (Criminal) 91/92, learned Principal Judge, Family Court rejected the prayer. Hence the present revision.3. The only question which has arisen in this case is whether a father is liable to pay maintenance of his child who has attained majority. Learned counsel for the respondents submitted that that the son Merajul is prosecuting his studies in higher secondary class and as he is unable to maintain himself he is entitled to...

Md. Ashan Ali Vs. Musstt. Junagar Begum and ors.

Court: Guwahati

P.C. Agarwal, J.1. Head Mr. D.C. Mahanta, learned counsel for the petitioner ad Mr. S. Ali, learned counsel for the respondents.2. The petitioner Ashan Ali was directed to pay maintenance to his wife and son vide order dated 24-4-79 by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kamrup, Guwahati in case No. 29/78. The petitioner paid the maintenance in compliance of the said order. Thereafter on 23-3-96 petitioner filed an application claiming exemption from paying maintenance to his son Merjul Ali on the ground that the said son has attained majority and vide order dated 30-6-97 passed in F.C. (Criminal) 91/92, learned Principal Judge, Family Court rejected the prayer. Hence the present revision.3. The only question which has arisen in this case is whether a father is liable to pay maintenance of his child who has attained majority. Learned counsel for the respondents submitted that that the son Merajul is prosecuting his studies in higher secondary class and as he is unable to maintain himself h...

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Satyanarayan Sikaria

Court: Guwahati

D.N. Chowdhury, J. 1. This reference under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, is made at the instance of the Revenue seeking for the opinion of the court on the following questions of law : '(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in view of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)'s order, the Tribunal is justified in directing the Assessing Officer to allow the claim of the annual charge of Rs. 2,10,000 under Section 24(1)(iv) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ? (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is correct in law in following the order passed by the Assessing Officer earlier which is patently wrong as per Section 171 read with the Explanation(s) on the ground that to reopen the issue of partition without altering the order under Section 171 of the Act is outside the jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer ?' 2. For the assessment year 1988-89, the assessee submitted his return of income as an individual. Prior...

Md. Ashan Ali Vs. Musstt. Junagar Begum

Court: Guwahati

Reported in: I(2000)DMC680

ORDERP.C. Agarwal, J. 1. Heard Mr. D.C. Mahanta, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Mr. S. Ali, learned Counsel for the respondents.2. The petitioner Ashan Ali was directed to pay maintenance to his wife and son vide order dated 24.4.1979 by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kamrup, Guwahati in Case No. 29/78. The petitioner paid the maintenance in compliance of the said order. Thereafter on 23.3.1996 petitioner filed an application claiming exemption from paying Maintenance to his son Merajul Ali on the ground that the said son has attained majority and vide order dated 30.6.1997 passed in F.C. (Criminal) 91/92, learned Principal Judge, Family Court rejected the prayer. Hence the present revision.3. The only question which has arisen in this case is whether a father is liable to pay maintenance to his child who has attained majority. Learned Counsel for the respondents submitted that the son Merajul is prosecuting his studies in higher secondary class and as he is unable to maintain ...

ingudam Lukhoi Singh and anr. Vs. Ingudam Tomba Singh and ors.

Court: Guwahati

1. I have heard Mr. H. Manglem, learned counsel for the appellants as well as Mr. A. Nilamani, learned senior counsel for the contesting respondents. None appeared for the respondent No.8 Executive Officer, Imphal Municipality. I have also considered the records of the case. 2. This Second Appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 19.6.1992 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Manipur East, in the First Appeal No. 19/89/6 of 1989. Learned Additional District Judge decreed the original suit No. 16 of 1987 and set aside the judgment and decree dated 24.7.1989 passed by the learned Munsiff at Imphal dismissing the said suit. 3. The case of the plaintiff (respondent No. 1 in this second appeal) in brief is that his father Thangong Singh died about 15 years ago leaving him, his brother Chaoba Singh (father of defendant Nos 1 to 6) and his two sisters respondent Nos.7 and 8. Chaoba Singh died in 1986. Late Thangong Singh was a lessee in respect of Imphal Municipa...

ingudam Lukhoi Singh and anr. Vs. Ingudam Tomba Singh and ors.

Court: Guwahati

1. I have heard Mr. H. Manglem, learned counsel for the appellants as well as Mr. A. Nilamani, learned senior counsel for the contesting respondents. None appeared for the respondent No.8 Executive Officer, Imphal Municipality. I have also considered the records of the case.2. This Second Appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 19.6.1992 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Manipur East, in the First Appeal No. 19/89/6 of 1989. Learned Additional District Judge decreed the original suit No. 16 of 1987 and set aside the judgment and decree dated 24.7.1989 passed by the learned Munsiff at Imphal dismissing the said suit.3. The case of the plaintiff (respondent No. 1 in this second appeal) in brief is that his father Thangong Singh died about 15 years ago leaving him, his brother Chaoba Singh (father of defendant Nos 1 to 6) and his two sisters respondent Nos.7 and 8. Chaoba Singh died in 1986. Late Thangong Singh was a lessee in respect of Imphal Municipality...

Ram Sankar Bhattacharjee Vs. Gauhati High Court and ors.

Court: Guwahati

1. The issue raised in this writ petition is as regards seniority of the writ petitioner and respondents 4 and 5. Though respondent No. 7 has been impleaded, no relief has been claimed against him. Thus decision of this case will be confined to the respective merits of the petitioner and respondents 4 and 5.2. Facts may be narrated in a nutshell. The petitioner was appointed temporarily and until further orders as Stenographer Grade-I in the Gauhati High Court at Principal Seat in the scale of Rs. 1125-1975 per month plus other allowances as admissible under the Rules with effect from the date of his assuming charge as such, by order dated 12th June, 1987 issued by the Registrar (Judicial).3. The petitioner was thereafter transferred to Agartala Bench of the Gauwhati High Court in the vacancy that was caused on promotion of respondent No. 7 to the post of Private Secretary. The said order was issued on 14th March, 1988 to the following effect:-"Shri R.S. Bhattacharjee, Grade-I Stenogra...

Jhumarmal JaIn Vs. Union of India (Uoi)

Court: Guwahati

J.N. Sarma, J.1. This writ application has been filed for refund of an amount of Rs. 85,600/- being the value of 56 bags of poppy seeds released plus Rs. 500/- being the penalty amount with a further claim for interest @ 18% p.a.2. The brief facts of the case are as follows:3. The petitioner is a businessman at Guwahati. 144 bags of poppy seeds were despatched from Manipur to the petitioner for arranging transportation thereof. The Customs authority seized the said 144 bags of poppy seeds weighing 9800 Kg. on 24-12-1985 under the seizure case. The goods being perishable in nature, were released provisionally on payment of security of the full value of Rs. 1,56,000/-. Thereafter, the petitioner filed an appeal before the Collector of Customs and Central Excise at Shillong and thereafter the Collector of Customs & Central Excise passed the following finding and order was passed :'FindingsI have gone through the case records including reply to the Show Cause Notice, submissions made at t...