Guwahati Court June 2000 Judgments

The Assam State Electricity Board, Guwahati and ors. Vs. Sanjoy Agarwa ...

Court: Guwahati

N. C. Jain, J. 1. This First Appeal has been filed against the judgment and decree of the trial Court by which the suit of the minor boy for compensation in the sum of Rs. 2,00,000/- along with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of filing the suit till realisation has been decreed.2. The appeal has been filed by the Assam State Electricity Board, Guwahati. (2) The Chairman, Assam State Electricity Board, (3) The Executive Engineer. Tinsukia Electrical Division, Tinsukia and (4) The Assistant Executive Engineer, Bordubi Electrical Sub-Division, P.O. Bordubi, District Tinsukia.3. The case of the plaintiff before the trial Court was that a high voltage i.e. 11,000 volts Electricity overhead electric line (conductor line) fell below Its overhead feeder for quite sometime before the date of occurrence in the open field near the Derial Tea Garden Hospital and that the same was hanging just 3 ft. above the ground when the plaintiff aged 11 years was playing there at 3 p.m. ...

Management of Tingal Ibam Tea Estate Vs. Presiding Officer, Labour Cou ...

Court: Guwahati

1. The legitimacy of the award dated 1.2.1994 passed by the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Dibrugarh in Misc Case No. 6/90 providing monetary benefit to the workmen on an application Under Section 33C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act. 1947 is the subject matter for adjudication in this writ petition that has arisen in the following circumstances. 2.The respondent No. 2 alongwith 164 workmen presented application Under Section 33C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act claiming the following amount and or monetary benefit as capable or computed in terms of money. 1. Enhanced wages @ Rs. 2.20 paise per day for the period 1.11.1989 to 31.3.1990 for 130 days in respect of 165 petitioners (Rs. 165 x 30 x 1.20) = 47,190.00. 2. Wages for paid holidays as on 26th January, 1st May and 15th August @ Rs. 15.30 paise per day (Rs. 165 x 3 x 15.30) = 7,573.50 3. Cash compensation for ration for the period 1.8.1989 to 30.6.1990 @ 600 gms per day valued @ Rs. 2.40 paise for 131 days (Rs. 165 x 131 x ...

Bhanumati Acharjee and ors. Vs. State of Assam

Court: Guwahati

P.G. Agarwal, J.1. This criminal appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 29.11.1996 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Cachar, Silchar in Sessions Case No. 113/94. whereby the accused appellants were convicted under Section 304B/34 IPC and sentenced to undergo R.I. for a period of 10 years.2. Heard Mr. J.M. Choudhury, learned Senior Counsel for the appellants and the learned Public Prosecutor, Assam.3. This is yet another case where a young bride was sacrificed at the alter of dowry. Shampa Acharjee. an educated lady was given In marriage to accused appellant Shantanu. The marriage was solemnized on 13th March, 1991. Both the parties were Hindu and according to their customs and belief, marriage ceremony is a sacred and solemn occasion where the bridegroom accepts the bride as his wife assuring her protection for the whole life. It is also believed that the marriage has been ordained in the heaven. Although there is no scope to look for worldly considerations on suc...

Debasish Deb Vs. Union of India and ors.

Court: Guwahati

1. Heard Mr. M. Kar Bhowmik, learned counsel along with Mr. B.C. Das, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. K.N. Bhattacharjce, learned sr. counsel along with Mr. S. Bhattacharjee, learned counsel for the respondents. 2. The petitioner Shri Debashish Deb appeared in a selection for the post of Assistant Account, held by the North Eastern Electrical Power Corporation (NEEPCO), respondent No. 2. He also received appointment letter, the last date of joining was 3.5.1999. When he went to join the office of the respondent No. 4 in persuance of the appointment letter, he was not permitted to join. Subsequently, on 12.4.1999, he was informed that the appointment to join. Subsequently, on 12.4.1999, he was informed that the appointment letter had been erroneously endorsed to the petitioner due to typographical mistake, hence the same stands cancelled. The petitioner has grievance against the said cancellation of his appointment letter. The defence of the petitioner is that in th...

Debasish Deb Vs. Union of India and ors.

Court: Guwahati

Reported in: 2001CriLJ1214

1. Heard Mr. M. Kar Bhowmik, learned counsel along with Mr. B.C. Das, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. K.N. Bhattacharjce, learned sr. counsel along with Mr. S. Bhattacharjee, learned counsel for the respondents.2. The petitioner Shri Debashish Deb appeared in a selection for the post of Assistant Account, held by the North Eastern Electrical Power Corporation (NEEPCO), respondent No. 2. He also received appointment letter, the last date of joining was 3.5.1999. When he went to join the office of the respondent No. 4 in persuance of the appointment letter, he was not permitted to join. Subsequently, on 12.4.1999, he was informed that the appointment to join. Subsequently, on 12.4.1999, he was informed that the appointment letter had been erroneously endorsed to the petitioner due to typographical mistake, hence the same stands cancelled. The petitioner has grievance against the said cancellation of his appointment letter.The defence of the petitioner is that in the sa...

Anil Kumar Battacharyya Vs. Union of India and ors.

Court: Guwahati

1. This writ application has been filed by a Senior Advocate of this Court for issue of a writ with a declaration that the action of the respondents and their officials are illegal, in not repairing the phone and restoring the Telephone No.568992 and with a further prayer to make enquiry to fix the responsibility on the erring officials of the Department also for a prayer to set aside and quash the two bills dated 1.2.1998 and 1.8.1998. 2. There was an interim order on 21.9.1998 to restore the Telephone and in pursuance of that the Telephone has been restored, 3. The brief facts of the case are as follows:- Rule 412 and Rule 446 of the Indian Telegraphs Rules (hereinafter called Rules. 1951) are quoted below: - '412. Supply and maintenance of equipment. (1) The Divisional Engineer, Telegraphs shall install and subject to the observance of these rules to the subscriber, maintain in good working order the equipment and apparatus provided by the Department and when necessary, substitute...

Union of India (Uoi) Vs. Gauhati Trading Co.

Court: Guwahati

J.N. Sarma, J. 1. This appeal has been filed under Section 28 of the Railway claims Tribunal Act, 1987 against the order dated 12.9.1991 passed in C.A. No. 18 of 1989, by the learned Railway Claims Tribunal, Guwahati Bench at Guwahati awarding Rs. 9,773.00 as compensation for damage to the respondent No. 1. 2. The brief facts of the case are as follows : 3. The applicant sent a consignment and the consignment was delivered to the applicant on 1.1.1987 and at the time of taking delivery it was found that 46 tins out of 574 tins of M. Oil were in dented and cracked condition and as a result thereof the shortage was found to the extend of 528 Kgs. of M. Oil. The case of the applicant was that the shortage was caused due to the negligence and misconduct on the part of the Agents/servants of the Railway Admn. In transit and as such there was a prayer for a decree for sum of Rs. 11,088. The Tribunal found that according to the bill Exbt. 6 the price of the goods comes to Rs. 9,467 and it wa...

L. Chihanpam and anr. Vs. State of Manipur and ors.

Court: Guwahati

1. Heard Mr. Ch. Joychandra learned counsel for the petitioner. Heard also Mrs. Bidyamani, learned Govt. Advocate. The writ petitioner No. 1 while serving as Assistant Graduate Teacher was engaged as Assistant Inspector of Schools against the regular incumbent who retired from service with immediate effect vide order dated 5th December, 1994. The petitioner No. 2 was also given similar order against the vacancy caused by promotion of the regular incumbent as Headmaster as Assistant Inspector of Schools while serving as Assistant Graduate Teacher vide order dated 13th June, 1995. Mr. Joiychandra, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the writ petitioners have already put in service as Assistant Inspector of Schools for five years continuously and they have completely given up teaching. Though they have not been regularly appointed as Assistant Inspector of Schools, they have been rendering services as is done by regularly appointed A.Is. It is also contended that in fact t...

Anil Kumar Battacharyya Vs. Union of India and ors.

Court: Guwahati

1. This writ application has been filed by a Senior Advocate of this Court for issue of a writ with a declaration that the action of the respondents and their officials are illegal, in not repairing the phone and restoring the Telephone No.568992 and with a further prayer to make enquiry to fix the responsibility on the erring officials of the Department also for a prayer to set aside and quash the two bills dated 1.2.1998 and 1.8.1998.2. There was an interim order on 21.9.1998 to restore the Telephone and in pursuance of that the Telephone has been restored,3. The brief facts of the case are as follows:-Rule 412 and Rule 446 of the Indian Telegraphs Rules (hereinafter called Rules. 1951) are quoted below: - '412. Supply and maintenance of equipment. (1) The Divisional Engineer, Telegraphs shall install and subject to the observance of these rules to the subscriber, maintain in good working order the equipment and apparatus provided by the Department and when necessary, substitute a di...

T. Phungzathang Vs. Hangkhanlian and ors.

Court: Guwahati

1. The petitioner in Election Petition No. 1 of 2000 was a candidate for the 48-Churachandpur Assembly Constituency in the 7th Manipur Legislative Assembly Election. In the said election, respondent No. 1 was declared elected from the said constituency on 26.2.2k. Respondents No. 2 and 3 were also the candidates for the said constituency in the said election. Respondent No. 5 is the Chief Electoral Officer, State of Manipur, And Respondent No. 6 was the Returning Officer for the Churachandpur Assembly Constituency. Respondents No. 7 to 10 were the Presiding Officers of different polling stations in the said Constituency. In the Election Petition, the case of the petitioner is that the respondent No. 1 and his agents/men committed various corrupt practices within the meaning of section 123 of the Representation of People Act, 1951, (for short, 'the RPA, 1951') as narrated in the Election Petition and that the election of the respondent No. 1 was liable to be declared void under sectio...