Guwahati Court August 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.
Zashevol Angami Vs. State of Nagaland and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Aug-23-2001
P.C. Phukan, J. 1. I have heard Mr. M. Khroe, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. Y. Longkumer, learned Govt. Advocate appearing for the respondents. 2. The petitioner was serving as an UDA in T. M. Govt. High School. He was served a copy of the impugned order dated 10.9.1996 issued by the Additional Director of School Education. Relevant portion of the impugned order (Annexure-D) is extracted below : '.... Whereas a disciplinary proceeding against Shri Mhasikhol,UDA of T.M. Government High School, Kohima is contemplated. 2. Now, therefore, the undersigned in exercise of the powers conferred by Sub-rule (1) of Rule (1) of the Nagaland Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1967 hereby places the said Shri Mhasikhol UDA, T.M. Government High School under suspension with effect from the date of issue of this order.' It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that at that point of time there was no person named Mhasikhol serving in the establishment of T.M. Government High Scho...
Tatortaloh and ors. Vs. State of Arunachal Pradesh and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Aug-17-2001
1. These 2 (two) cases involve common questions of facts and laws and, as such, the same wore taken up analogously and, accordingly, these two writ petitions are hereby finally disposed of an its own merit with the following common judgment and order.2. In Writ Petition (C) No. 162(AP) 2000, the petitioners 10 in number mentioned above sought for a direction to the State respondents/ competent authority to appoint them to the post of Junior Teacher by contending inter alia, that they were selected and their names had been placed/put in the related Waiting List at Sl. Nos. 9, 15, 24, 44, 22, 135, 45, 37, 21 and 66 as seen in the document marked as Annexure-3 to the writ petition in terms of the related select list prepared by the Selection Board consequent upon the public advertisement dated 3.11.1997 for such recruitment and appointment to the post of Junior Teacher but, they have not been given appointment to the said post as per merit of the select list, however in the month of April...
Bhupendra Tripura Vs. State of Tripura
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Aug-17-2001
B.B. Deb, J. 1. This revision petition is directed against the order dated 06.04.2001 passed by the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Sabroom in case No.NGR 97/2001 under Section 41(1) of CrPC and also for quashing the aforesaid proceeding.2. The case leading to the present revision petition may be summarised as under:- According to the revision petition, the petitioner was brought to Manubazar Police Station under South Tripura District for interrogation on 29.3.2001 under arrest and in the plea of interrogation he was physically tortured by the Police and forwarded to the Court of learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate only on 2.4.2001 showing his arrest on 2.4.2001 though virtually he was detained under Police custody since 29.3.2001. Though there was no specific case registered against the petitioner, the Police without any reason alleged that the petitioner was a collaborator of NLFT (an extremist militant organisation in Tripura). On 2.4.2001 being moved with a ba...
Tatortaloh and ors. Vs. State of Arunachal Pradesh and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Aug-17-2001
N.S. Singh, J. 1. These 2 (two) cases involve common questions of facts and lawsand, as such, the same wore taken up analogously and, accordingly, these two writ petitions are hereby finally disposed of an its own merit with the following common judgment and order. 2. In Writ Petition (C) No. 162(AP) 2000, the petitioners 10 in number mentioned above sought for a direction to the State respondents/ competent authority to appoint them to the post of Junior Teacher by contending inter alia, that they were selected and their names had been placed/put in the related Waiting List at Sl. Nos. 9, 15, 24, 44, 22, 135, 45, 37, 21 and 66 as seen in the document marked as Annexure-3 to the writ petition in terms of the related select list prepared by the Selection Board consequent upon the public advertisement dated 3.11.1997 for such recruitment and appointment to the post of Junior Teacher but, they have not been given appointment to the said post as per merit of the select list, however in the...
State of Bank of India Vs. Swapan Basak and anr.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Aug-13-2001
J.N. Sarma, J. 1. This appeal has been filed by the State Bank of India against a portion of the judgment with regard to payment of interest. That portion of the judgment is quoted below : '6. In the result, I am constrained to hold that the plaintiff-bank is not entitled to claim the amount of Rs. 2,62,079.30 With further interest thereon @ 12.5% p.a. from the date of filing of the suit till realisation of the decretal amount. The plaintiff bank is entitled to claim the principal amount due to it after adjustment of all the deposit made by the defendants. The plaintiff-bank shall also be entitled to claim simple interest @ 12 1/2 p.a. till filing of the suit on the principal due and further interest @ 8% from the date of filing of the suit till realisation of the decretal amount.' 2. This matter is no longer res Integra in view of the decision of the Apex Court in AIR 1998 SC 1101 (N.M. Veerappa appellant v. Canara Bank, respondent) wherein the Apex Court pointed out that in a mor...
Midul Saikia Vs. Food Corporation of India
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Aug-13-2001
A.H. Saikia, J. 1. Heard Mr. B.P. Kataki, learned Sr. counsel assisted by Mr. T.J. Mahanta, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and also heard Mrs. A. Hazarika, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the F.C.I.2. The only grievance of the petitioner in this writ petition is that though admittedly the petitioner belongs to Scheduled Tribes (Plains) community, he has not been promoted when his juniors i.e. respondents 5 and 6 have been promoted vide office order dated 31.3.1989 (Annexure-2 to the writ petition).3. Mr. Kataki, learned Sr. Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner contends that when the petitoner was appointed as Watchman/Messenger vide appointment letter dated 27.5.78 (Annexure to the writ petition), the said appointment letter itself clearly showed the petitioner as Scheduled Tribes. As per Clause 3 of the said appointment letter, the petitioner, at the time of his Joining, did not require to furnish any Caste Certificate to prove that he belonge...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Down Town Hospital Ltd.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Aug-09-2001
A.K. Patnaik, J. 1. This is an appeal under Section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act, 1961'). 2. The respondent herein carries on the business of a hospital. For the assessment year 1994-95, the respondent claimed a deduction under Section 80HH and Section 80-I of the Act of 1961, amounting to Rs. 14,85,387. The Assessing Officer, namely, the Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax (Assessment), Special Range-I, Guwahati, in his assessment order under Section 143(3) of the Act of 1961, dated March 5, 1997, held that since the assessee-company was not an industrial undertaking, it was not eligible for deduction under Sections 80HH and 80-I of the Act of 1961. Against thesaid order of assessment, the respondent filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), Guwahati. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) held that the issue as to whether the respondent was entitled to deduction under Sections 80HH and 80-I of the Act of 1961, had been...
Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Arun Dutta and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Aug-08-2001
A.H. Saikia, J. 1. Heard Mr. S. Dutta, learned counsel for the appellant. Also heard Mr. T.J. Mahanta, learned counsel for the respondent. 2. This appeal is directed against the impugned award dated 28.2.1997 passed by the Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, North Lakhimpur in MACT Case No. 59/94 awarding an amount of Rs. 12,000 against the claim of the Rs. 1,80,000 made by the claimant who suffered a fractured leg due to the sudden put up of break of the vehicle by the driver while the claimant was travelling in the night supper bus from Tezpur to Lakhimpur. 3. I have perused the award so passed by the learned Member of the Tribunal. On careful examination of the impugned award, it appears that the Tribunal has properly appreciated the evidences as well as considered the materials available on record and after hearing the learned counsel for the parties, passed the award of Rs. 12,000 inclusive of interim relief, if any with interest @ 12% from the date of claim till the deposit...
Employees State Insurance Corporation and anr. Vs. Steel Engineers and ...
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Aug-07-2001
A.H. Saikia, J. Heard Mr. B R Dey, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants - ESI Corporation. Also heard Mr. B K Katakey, learned counsel for the opposite parties -respondent.1. The short question of law involved in this Appeal is that whether Sub-section (6) of Section 1 of the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948 amended in the year 1989 shall have the effect of retrospective operation or prospective operation. Mr. Dey, learned counsel for the appellant contends that once the respondent-Industry started the contribution under the Act, shall be liable for such contribution even after there is less number of employees as prescribed under the act for making them liable for contribution in terms of the amended provision of Section 1(6) of the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1949 (hereinafter in short referred to as 'Act').2. Before we go to discuss the issue in hand, it would be appropriate to look into the Provision of Section 1(6) which reads as follows: '..A factory or...
Ghisalal Durga Dutta Vs. Bina Das and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Aug-07-2001
T.N. Singh, J.1. On 21.11.1977 Motilal Das was travelling in a bus when at a place near Raha, at about 7.30 pm, the bus dashed against a stationary truck. The impact was so big that the bus capsized. Though some of the other passengers received minor injuries. Motilal was severely injured and was therefore taken to Nowgong Civil Hospital, where he was declared dead. He left behind his wife and three minor daughters. An application under Section 110-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939, for short the Act or Motor Vehicle Act, was filed by the widow claiming compensation for herself and for her three minor daughters on account of death of her husband in the said motor accident. In the application the registered owner of the bus, the insurer, as well as the financier under the Hire Purchase Agreement which the registered owner had entered with it, were impleaded as opposite parties. After the matter was heard by the learned Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Nowgong, for short the Trib...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »