Guwahati Court March 2001 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.
Monilal Bakshi Vs. Dipak Ranjan Bakshi
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Mar-23-2001
1. Heard Mr. M. Singh learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. GP Bhowmick learned counsel for the opposite party. 2. In this revision the short point that has arisen for consideration is that whether a proceeding drawn under Section 144 CrPC can be converted to a proceeding under Section 145 CrPC. Although there is no specific provision under the Criminal Procedure Code, various High Courts have held that proceeding drawn under Section 144 CrPC may be converted to a proceeding under 145 CrPC in appropriate cases. This court will like to agree with the above provision. 3. The next question that comes for determination is when a court can pass order of conversion. In view of the provisions under Section 144(4) CrPC no order passed in a proceeding under Section 144 CrPC shall remain in force for more than two months from the date of making the order thereof. There is a proviso which provides for extension of the period for two months but admittedly the proviso is not applicable in ...
Kamal JaIn Vs. State of Assam and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Mar-22-2001
1. This writ appeal is projected against the judgment and order dated 4.6.1999 passed by the learned Single Judge in Civil Rule No. 2841 of 1993.2. The appellant/writ petitioner is the sole proprietor of M/s. Manika Enterprise having its place of business at T.R Phukan Road, Fancy Bazar, Guwahati. The appellant/petitioner, it is stated, is engaged in the business in the Misri (Sugar Candy) and Makhana (whole-gram coated with sugar). The appellant/petitioner's grievance, in a nutshell, is that while sugar is an exempted item contained in Schedule 1 of the Assam General Sales Tax Act, 1993, sugar candy in which the appellant/petitioner is carrying on business, has not been conferred the benefit of exemption though sugar candy is nothing but sugar, the only difference between the two being in the process of manufacture. The learned Single Judge has negated the claim of the petitioner on the ground that it is within the power and competence of the State Legislature to confer and deny the b...
Khargeswar Choudhury and anr. Vs. Isfaque HussaIn and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Mar-22-2001
1. The factual matrix of this case depicts the callousness and lacklustre attitude on the part of a lawyer conducting in a case. A time has come when some authority must step in and take an appropriate step against such a Lawyer because such a Lawyer is not only a black sheep to this institution but also has caused grave injustice to the litigant public. I do no want to proceed in this matter and I leave it here. This is the preface.2. A suit was filed by the opposite party being TS 42/87 before the learned Asstt. District Judge No. 1 at Guwahati against one Ram Chandra Gowala, who was the principle defendant. That suit was contested by the defendant No. 1 by filing written statement and the written statement was file on 5.1.1990. Thereafter the suit proceeded as usual and the plaintiff was examined on 17.3.1992. Learned Lawyer for defendant took time to cross examine the witnesses. In the meantime the sole defendant died on 4.2.1993 due to prolong illness. The fact that he was sufferi...
Kamal JaIn Vs. State of Assam and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Mar-22-2001
Ranjan Gogoi, J.1. This writ appeal is projected against the judgment and order dated 4.6.1999 passed by the learned Single Judge in Civil Rule No. 2841 of 1993.2. The appellant/writ petitioner is the sole proprietor of M/s. Manika Enterprise having its place of business at T.R Phukan Road, Fancy Bazar, Guwahati. The appellant/petitioner, it is stated, is engaged in the business in the Misri (Sugar Candy) and Makhana (whole-gram coated with sugar). The appellant/petitioner's grievance, in a nutshell, is that while sugar is an exempted item contained in Schedule 1 of the Assam General Sales Tax Act, 1993, sugar candy in which the appellant/petitioner is carrying on business, has not been conferred the benefit of exemption though sugar candy is nothing but sugar, the only difference between the two being in the process of manufacture. The learned Single Judge has negated the claim of the petitioner on the ground that it is within the power and competence of the State Legislature to confe...
Khargeswar Choudhury and anr. Vs. Isfaque HussaIn and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Mar-22-2001
1. The factual matrix of this case depicts the callousness and lacklustre attitude on the part of a lawyer conducting in a case. A time has come when some authority must step in and take an appropriate step against such a Lawyer because such a Lawyer is not only a black sheep to this institution but also has caused grave injustice to the litigant public. I do no want to proceed in this matter and I leave it here. This is the preface.2. A suit was filed by the opposite party being TS 42/87 before thelearned Asstt. District Judge No. 1 at Guwahati against one Ram Chandra Gowala, who was the principle defendant. That suit was contested by the defendant No. 1 by filing written statement and the written statement was file on 5.1.1990. Thereafter the suit proceeded as usual and the plaintiff was examined on 17.3.1992. Learned Lawyer for defendant took time to cross examine the witnesses. In the meantime the sole defendant died on 4.2.1993 due to prolong illness. The fact that he was sufferin...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Assam Frontier Tea Ltd.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Mar-21-2001
K. Sema, J. 1. The revenue has referred the following questions under Section 256(1) of the income Tax Act, 1961 before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal : '1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Tribunal was not in error in law and in facts in holding that the Commissioner of Income-tax was justified in holding the bona fides of the change in the method of valuation of closing stock and in that view of the matter in deleting the addition of Rs. 1,29,43,042? 2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in view of the first provision of clause (ii) of sub-section (1) of Section 36 of the I.T. Act. 1961 as existed during therelevant assessment year. The Tribunal has not erred in law and in facts in upholding Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeal's) order deleting disallowances of Rs. 26,29,657 on account of ex-gratia payment paid in excess of the payment of Bonus Act, 1965 on the ground that the payment has been made wholly and exclusively ...
Cit Vs. Assam Frontier Tea Ltd.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Mar-21-2001
H. K. Sema, J.The revenue has referred the following questions under section 256(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was not in error in law and in facts in holding that the Commissioner was justified in holding the bona fides of the change in the method of valuation of closing stock and in that view of the matter in deleting the addition of Rs. 1,29,43,042 ?2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in view of the first proviso of clause (ii) of sub-section (1) of section 36 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, as existed during the relevant assessment year, the Tribunal has not erred in law and in facts in upholding the Commissioner (Appeals) order deleting disallowances of Rs. 26,29,657 on account of ex gratia payment paid in excess of the Payment of Bonus Act, 1965, on the ground that the payment has been made wholly and exclusively for the purpose of t...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Assam Frontier Tea Ltd.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Mar-21-2001
K. Sema, J. 1. The revenue has referred the following questions under Section 256(1) of the income Tax Act, 1961 before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal : '1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Tribunal was not in error in law and in facts in holding that the Commissioner of Income-tax was justified in holding the bona fides of the change in the method of valuation of closing stock and in that view of the matter in deleting the addition of Rs. 1,29,43,042? 2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in view of the first provision of clause (ii) of sub-section (1) of Section 36 of the I.T. Act. 1961 as existed during therelevant assessment year. The Tribunal has not erred in law and in facts in upholding Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeal's) order deleting disallowances of Rs. 26,29,657 on account of ex-gratia payment paid in excess of the payment of Bonus Act, 1965 on the ground that the payment has been made wholly and exclusively the ...
Khagen Konwar and ors. Vs. Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Ltd. and or ...
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Mar-19-2001
A.K. Patnaik, J. 1. The case of the nine (9) petitioners in this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution is that they have been engaged by the Deputy Superintending Engineer, Oil & Natural Gas Corporation Ltd. Lakwa Unit, for daily cleaning, maintenance and allied works, etc. since the year 1988 through the work orders issued from time to time. Their further case is that although in the work orders the petitioners have been referred to as contractors, the petitioners themselves have been doing the aforesaid work relating to daily cleaning, maintenance, allied works, etc. bringing additional persons as and when necessary to carry out the said work. Despite the fact that the petitioners have rendered their services for such daily cleaning, maintenance and allied works in the Lakwa Unit of the respondent No. 4 continuously for more than 12 years, the Oil & Natural Gas Corporation Limited, (for short, 'the corporation'), has issued a notice on May 23, 2000 in the newspaper in...
Hemkatna Deka and ors. Vs. State of Assam and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Mar-19-2001
D. Biswas, J. 1. Civil Rule No. 1411/97 and Writ Petition (C) No. 2590 of 2000 are being disposed of by this common judgment. 2. Both the writ petitions have been filed for a declaration that Clause (c) of Rule 3 of the Assam Elementary Education (Provincialisation) Rules, 1997 as ultra vires of the Constitution and for quashing the impugned advertisement dated 28.12.1996 (Annexure-II) so far it relates to the recruitment of Assistant Teachers in Morigaon District with consequential direction for appointment of the petitioners as Assistant Teachers in L.P., M.V. or M.E. Schools in the said District. 3. This court by an interim order dated 11.3.1998 directed that no appointment of Assistant Teachers in Morigaon District be made until further orders. As a result, no appointment could be made. 4. Petitioners' case is that the respondents issued an advertisementon 3.9.1991 inviting applications for filling up 7,606 posts of Assistant Teachers in different lower primary schools. The peti...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »