Guwahati Court May 2000 Judgments

Govinda Chandra Das Vs. Balo Ram Boro

Court: Guwahati

1. This appeal has been filed against the Judgment and Order dated 22/7/94 passed by the Assistant District Judge, Barpeta in Title Appeal No. 26 of 1993. By the Judgment he affirmed the earlier Judgment and Decree dated 16.10.93 passed by the Munsiff No. 2, Barpeta in title Suit No. 25 of 1992. The learned Munsiff dismissed the suit, Hence this Second Appeal. . 2. The following are the substantial question of law :- (1) The Trial Court held that the sale of the land can not be termed as valid at the time of purchase as the suit land was Annual Patta land. The Appellate Court on the other hand came to the finding that the transfer was valid only during the period of subsistence of the annual lease and it cased to be valid as soon as the annual lease was converted to periodic patta and that the plaintiff can not acquire any right, title and interest over the suit land against the defendant. But both the courts below failed to decide, whether the plaintiff could claim right, title and ...

Govinda Chandra Das Vs. Balo Ram Boro

Court: Guwahati

1. This appeal has been filed against the Judgment and Order dated 22/7/94 passed by the Assistant District Judge, Barpeta in Title Appeal No. 26 of 1993. By the Judgment he affirmed the earlier Judgment and Decree dated 16.10.93 passed by the Munsiff No. 2, Barpeta in title Suit No. 25 of 1992. The learned Munsiff dismissed the suit, Hence this Second Appeal. .2. The following are the substantial question of law :-(1) The Trial Court held that the sale of the land can not be termed as valid at the time of purchase as the suit land was Annual Patta land. The Appellate Court on the other hand came to the finding that the transfer was valid only during the period of subsistence of the annual lease and it cased to be valid as soon as the annual lease was converted to periodic patta and that the plaintiff can not acquire any right, title and interest over the suit land against the defendant. But both the courts below failed to decide, whether the plaintiff could claim right, title and inte...

Goodricke Group Ltd. Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Taxes (Appeals)

Court: Guwahati

D. Biswas, J.1. Heard Dr. A.K. Saraf, learned counsel for the petitioner assisted by Mr. S. K. Agarwalla, and also Mr. A.K. Goswami, learned counsel for the respondent.2. This agricultural income-tax reference under Section 28(2) of the Assam Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1939, has been referred to this court by the Assam Board of Revenue on the following questions of law :'(i) Whether the Board, in deciding the appeal, was right in relying solely on the provisions of Section 8(2)((f)(vii) of the Assam Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1939, as it stood prior to its amendment by the Assam Agricultural Income-tax (Third Amendment) Act, 1989, without considering the implication of the second proviso to Section 8(2) of the said Act and the provisions of rule 5 of the Assam Agricultural Income-tax Rules, 1939 ?(ii) Whether the Board was right in holding that the assessing authorities under the Assam Agricultural Income-tax Act have to accept the same computation without any discretion to apply ...

Ranee Narah Vs. State of Assam and ors.

Court: Guwahati

1. In this writ petition the petitioner has impugned the order dated18-9-99 passed by the 2nd respondent thereby suspending temporarily the Bonded Warehouse owned by the petitioner purportedly in exercise of power under Section 29 of the Assam Excise Act, 1910 and Rule 24 of the Assam Bonded Warehouse Rules, 1965. 2. Basic facts giving rise to the filing of the present writ petition is summarily recited. Respondent No. 2 by an order dated 20th Jan.' 95 issued a Bonded Warehouse licence to the petitioner under the provision of Assam Bonded Warehouse Rules, 1965. The said Bonded Warehouse is located at Abbash Market, K.B. Road, Noth Lakhimpur town. The licence was subjected to renewal every year on payment of renewal fees. Further, an agreement was executed with the conditions stipulated therein. One of such conditions was that the petitioner should execute Deed of Hypothecation and bond of Rs. 20 lakh for complying with the terms and conditions of the licence as well as the provision ...

Goodricke Group Ltd. Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Taxes (Appeals)

Court: Guwahati

Reported in: [2000]244ITR687(Gauhati)

D. Biswas, J.1. Heard Dr. A.K. Saraf, learned counsel for the petitioner assisted by Mr. S. K. Agarwalla, and also Mr. A.K. Goswami, learned counsel for the respondent.2. This agricultural income-tax reference under Section 28(2) of the Assam Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1939, has been referred to this court by the Assam Board of Revenue on the following questions of law :'(i) Whether the Board, in deciding the appeal, was right in relying solely on the provisions of Section 8(2)((f)(vii) of the Assam Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1939, as it stood prior to its amendment by the Assam Agricultural Income-tax (Third Amendment) Act, 1989, without considering the implication of the second proviso to Section 8(2) of the said Act and the provisions of rule 5 of the Assam Agricultural Income-tax Rules, 1939 ? (ii) Whether the Board was right in holding that the assessing authorities under the Assam Agricultural Income-tax Act have to accept the same computation without any discretion to apply ...

Ranee Narah Vs. State of Assam and ors.

Court: Guwahati

ORDER In pursuance of the enquiry report from Chief Minister's Special Vigilance Cell communicated in their letter No. SVC/E/26/99/C/ 217 dt. 18-9-99. Indicating serious irregularities by way of violation to the terms and conditions of the licence, the operation of the Bonded warehouse licence holding by Mrs. Rani Narah, Proprietor of M/S R.N. Bonded Warehouse, North Lakhimpur is hereby suspended temporarily with immediate effect under section 29 of Assam Excise Act, 1910 and Rule 24 of the Assam Bonded Warehouse Rules. 1965. Sd/- B. Basumatary,Commissioner of Excise, Assam,Silpukhuri, Guwahati -3.'7. As would appear from the impugned order the respondent No. 2 has exercised power under section 20 of the Assam Excise Act and Rule 24 of the Assam Bonded Warehouse Rules pursuant to a report submitted by the Chief Minister's Spl. Vigilance Cell. To appreciate the controversy in proper perspective, a quick survey of the sets of Act and Rules would become necessary.8. Section 29 of the Assa...

Keisam Shantipur Singh and ors. Vs. State of Manipur and ors.

Court: Guwahati

1. All the writ applications raise the common question of law and facts and as such they are taken up for hearing together. 2. I have heard Mr. Ashok Potsangbam, learned Advocate for the petitioners in Civil Rule No.734/96, WP(C) No.374/99, WP(C) No.629/1999, Mr. N. Kotishwar Singh, learned Advocate for the petitioners in WP(C) No.864/99, Mr S. Jayent, learned Advocate for the petitioners in WP(C) No.236/1999 and Civil Rule No.512/ 1996, Mr. N. Pramod Chandra, learned Advocate for the petitioner in WP(C) No.720/99 and Mr. T. Nirmal Chand, learned Advocate for the petitioners in WP(C) No. 1109/99. I have also heard Mr. Nimaichand, learned GA, Manipur for the official respondents in all the writ petitions, Mr. N. Pramod Chandra, learned Advocate for the respondents No. 4 to 12 (in CR No.734/96). WP(C) No.374/ 99 for the private respondents, Mr. L. Sarat Singh, learned counsel for the private respondents in WP(C) No.864/99 and Mr. L. Nandakumar, learned Advocate for the private respond...

Maibam Dhananjoy Singh Vs. State of Manipur

Court: Guwahati

1. I have heard Shri Koteswar, learned Advocate for the petitioner and Shri Nimai Chand, learned Advocate for the Respondents. Notice of motion was issued in this case on 1.2.2000 and it was made returnable within three weeks. Be that as it may till to-day no affidavit-in-opposition had been filed. No record has been produced. I feel that this matter can be disposed of. 2. The petitioner herein originally joined as Extension Officer and was subsequently promoted in the year 1978 as Assistant Director of Industries (Chemical) and also held the equivalent post of Development Officer (DIC). Thereafter the petitioner was appointedas Functional Manager (Credit). The petitioner was regularised to the post of Functional Manager (Credit) with effect from 24.5.86. the petitioner claims that he is eligible to be promoted as General Manager (DIC). The petitioner was appointed as General Manager (DIC) on In-charge basis for a brief period of 10(ten) months. Thereafter the petitioner was again a...

Maibam Dhananjoy Singh Vs. State of Manipur

Court: Guwahati

1. I have heard Shri Koteswar, learned Advocate for the petitioner and Shri Nimai Chand, learned Advocate for the Respondents. Notice of motion was issued in this case on 1.2.2000 and it was made returnable within three weeks. Be that as it may till to-day no affidavit-in-opposition had been filed. No record has been produced. I feel that this matter can be disposed of. 2. The petitioner herein originally joined as Extension Officer and was subsequently promoted in the year 1978 as Assistant Director of Industries (Chemical) and also held the equivalent post of Development Officer (DIC). Thereafter the petitioner was appointedas Functional Manager (Credit). The petitioner was regularised to the post of Functional Manager (Credit) with effect from 24.5.86. the petitioner claims that he is eligible to be promoted as General Manager (DIC). The petitioner was appointed as General Manager (DIC) on In-charge basis for a brief period of 10(ten) months. Thereafter the petitioner was again appo...

Keisam Shantipur Singh and ors. Vs. State of Manipur and ors.

Court: Guwahati

ORDER Imphal, the 19th February, 1996. No.3/10/9/94-PHE:Whereas the following listed 10 Section Officers of the Public Health Engineering Department, Manipur were eligible for appointment to the post of Section Officer Grade-I as per the existing Recruitment Rule of Section Officer of the PHED, Manipur on the date of their initial ad hoc appointment given against each of them. 1. Th. Joychandra Singh - 14.1.19762. S. Lokendra Singh - 18.9.19783. Md. Manawar Ali - 18.9.19784. K. Arjit Singh - 18.9.19785. L.K. Somi - 19.8.19786. A. Pukeho Mao - 18.9.19787. M. Joychandra Singh - 20.9.19788. M. Borojao Singh - 25.10.19789. L. Ibohanbi Singh - 27.10.197810. N. Sarat Singh - 27.10.1978 2. Whereas, regular vacancies are available on the date of their initial ad hoc appointment as they had been continuing their ad hoc services without break/Interruption till their regularisation to the concerned posts of S.Os. on the recommendation of a competent DPC associated with MPSC. 3. Whereas, they w...