Guwahati Court May 2002 Judgments

Kamala Kanta Oza and ors. Vs. State of Assam and ors.

Court: Guwahati

A.H. Saikia, J. 1. In both these Civil Rules the respective Writ Petitioners mainly challenged the allotment of ceiling surplus land by the State-Respondents in favour of private respondents arrayed in these writ petitions seeking a direction from this Court for quashing of those allotments with a further direction restraining the private respondents from making any construction over the so allotted land in question. Since the question of law based on almost identical facts involved in these writ petitioners are similar, I propose to hear these writ petitions analogously and dispose of the same by this common order.2. Heard Mr. P.C. Deka, learned sr. counsel, Mr. M.K. Choudhury and Mr. N. Dutta, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. A.S. Bhattacharyya, Mr. G.N. Sahewalla, Mr. C. Choudhury, Mr. J. Roy and Mr. K. Paul, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the private Respondents. Also heard Mr. A.C. Buragohain, learned Addl. Sr. Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the...

Mwc Market Services Pvt. Ltd. and anr. Vs. State of Manipur and ors.

Court: Guwahati

Reported in: AIR2003Gau25,2003(1)ARBLR454(Gau)

ORDERN. Surjamani Singh, J. 1. Petitioner No. 1, MWC Market Services Private Limited and another, in this application under Section 11(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act. 1996, (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act. 1996') sought for appointment of a sole Arbitrator on the basis of a related agreement dated 5-4-2001 by contending, inter alia, that the petitioner-company after a series of discussions with the respondent-authorities and obtaining due approval of the State Cabinet on 5-4-2001 entered into an agreement with the State Government of Manipur to install, commission, promote and market the sale of lottery tickets and operate in all respects the on-line Lottery on behalf of the State of Manipur as seen in the document marked as Annexure 3 to the petition, and after execution of the agreement dated 5-4-2001, the petitioner-company in all earnest and to fulfil and commit the obligations under the agreement started all preparations for starting the launching of the One-line ...

Simanchal Digal Vs. GunIn Hazarika and ors.

Court: Guwahati

Ranjan Gogoi, J. 1. Defeated at the hustings, by what the petitioner perceives to be a narrow margin of 536 votes, the instant election petition has been filed for a declaration that the election of the respondent No. 1 from No. 89 Kaliabor Legislative Assembly Constituency (hereinafter referred to as 'the Constituency') is void and illegal. A further declaration that the petitioner is the duly elected candidate having secured the majority of valid votes polled has also been prayed for in the present election petition. 2. The pleadings of the respective parties may be set out at the first instance. According to the election petitioner as per the schedule of the election notified by the Election Commission of India, polling for the constituency was held on 10.5.2001. Counting of votes commenced at about 8/9 AM on 13.5.2001 in the premises of Kaliabor College, Counting was completed at about 8.30 PM and the result was formally announced at about 0015 Hrs of 14.5.2001. According to the e...

Thanda Bala Choudhury and anr. Vs. Birendra Kumar Choudhury

Court: Guwahati

A.H. Saikia, J. 1. Upon consideration of an application under Order 14, Rule 2, Sub-rule 2(a) & (b) C.P.C., preferred by the defendant/respondent in T.S. No. 207/98 seeking the issues relating to cause of action as well as maintainability of the suit, being framed as Issues No. 1 and 5, to be decided as preliminary issues before taking up other issues the learned Civil Judge (Sr. Division) by his order dated 11.7.2000 accepted the prayer of the Defendant/Respondent and those issues Nos. 1 and 5 were considered to be heard as preliminary issues before going to decide the other issues. More so, the said learned Judge by his another Order dated 1.9.2000, while dealing with a seperate Petition under order 14, Rule 5 read with Section 151 C.P.C filed by the Plaintiffs/Petitioners praying for framing two additional issues, i.e. Issue No. l (A) and 1(B), i.e., whether the Plaintiffs are entitled to get a decree for declaration of their right, title and interest over the property, left by l...

Bongaigaon Refinery and Petro-chemicals Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Incom ...

Court: Guwahati

Ranjan Gogoi, J. 1. Heard Dr. A. K. Saraf, Learned Sr, Counsel for the petitioner and Mr. U. Bhuyan. Learned Standing Counsel for the Income Tax. 2. As agreed to by both the parties and in order to prevent possible prejudice to public interest that may be occasioned by keeping this writ petitions pending. This court considers it appropriate to pass final orders in the present writ applications. 3. Both the writ applications have been filed challenging the common order dated 17.5.2002 passed by the Learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Gauhati Bench in ITA Nos. 46 and 48 (Gauhati) of 2002. By the aforementioned order dated 17.5.2002, the Learned Tribunal had rejected the aforesaid appeals filed by the petitioner/assessee on the grounds stated therein giving liberty to the assessee to move the Tribunal once again for recall of the order, in the event, the approval of the High Power Committee is obtained by the assessee for prosecution of the appeals before the Learned Tribunal. The fa...

Union of India (Uoi) Vs. State of Assam and ors.

Court: Guwahati

P.O. Agarwal, J. 1. This is an application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India which has been filed by the Union of India through the General Manager, N.F. Railway, Maligaon, Guwahati-11, challenging the collection of sales tax by the State of Assam, stating, inter alia, that the same is violative of the provisions of Article 285(1) of the Constitution of India. 2. The petitioner runs a departmental canteen in various Railway Stations within the State of Assam through which food-stuff is supplied/sold, to the railway employees and railway passengers on no-profit/no-Loss basis. According to the petitioners, the State of Assam was collecting sales tax from them on such sale of food-stuff and the amount of sales tax paid by them is as under :YearAmount1993-941,77,005.001994-951,91,557.001995-962,20,563.001996-972,17,101.001997-982,46,562.00 That the amount of sales tax paid from April, 1998 to July, 1998 is shown below :MonthAmountApril 199822,214.00May 199825,082.00June 1998...

Ratna Roy Vs. State of Tripura and ors.

Court: Guwahati

B.B. Deb, J. 1. In this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner challenged the letter of recommendation bearing No. F. 66(1) - TPSC/94 dated 14.2.2001 by which the Tripura Public Service Commission, respondent No. 2 recommended the name of respondent No. 5, Shri Santanu Bhattacharjee for being appointed to the post of Assistant Professor, College of Teacher Education in the subject 'Education'. 2. The grievance of the petitioner is that pursuant to the advertisement No. 1/2000 dated 3.3.2000, floated by the respondent No. 2, the petitioner applied for the post of Assistant Professor, College of Teacher Education for the category of post - 'Education'. The petitioner did not get any interview/call letter at all, but surprisingly came to learn that the respondent No. 2 recommended the name of the respondent No. 5 for the post of Assistant Professor, College of Teacher Education in 'Education'. Hence she filed this writ petition on 28.2.2001 challengi...

Jatindra Nath Choudhury Vs. Sasadhar Choudhury and ors.

Court: Guwahati

A.H. Saikia, J.1. Heard Mr. N. Chakraborty, learned counsel assisted by Sri N. Chakraborty (Junior) learned counsel appearing for the appellant. None appeared for the respondents despite notice. The substantial question for law formulated in this second appeal, are as follows : (1) Whether the Vendor (i.e., the deceased mother of both the parties in this appeal can sell or transfer the land in question beyond an excess of her share in the land ? (2) Whether the Vendor above stated has a legal Saleable Right to sale property - the land in question beyond her share and in view of the same, whether such sell would be operative and valid and confer any title over the purchaser 2. Admittedly, this appeal has been preferred against the concurrent finding of the Courts below. Assailing the impugned judgment, Mr. Chakraborty, learned counsel has contended that the finding of the Court below are totally perverse and inconsistent with the evidence on record and as such, this is a fit case, whe...

Indian Institute of Bankers and ors. Vs. Jogabrats Deb and ors.

Court: Guwahati

A.H. Saikia, J.1. Heard Mr. S. S. Sarma, learned counsel for the petitioners and also heard Mr. B.R. Dey, learned counsel for the respondents. 2. This Revision petition is directed against the impugned order dated 16.2.1996 passed by the learned Munsiff No. 3 at Guwahati in T.S. No. 272/92. 3. The brief facts of the case are that the Respondent No. 1, being a permanent employee of the State Bank of India, appeared in the Associate Examination, Part - 1 in the year 1987 conducted by the petitioner No. 1, Indian Institute of Bankers. The Petitioner No. 1, being an association of Bankers with its principal object to encourage study of theory of banking and for this purpose to institute a scheme of examination and award certificate etc. The Petitioner No. 1 conducted some examinations from Bombay, being its Head Office without having any other office or branch office whatsoever outside Bombay. The examinations of the Institute were conducted on all India basis at about 530 centres all ov...

United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Maya Rani Debnath and anr.

Court: Guwahati

1. This judgment and order of ours will dispose of MAC Appeal No. 102 of 2000 and C.O. (F.A.) No. 8 of 2000.2. Briefly stated the facts here as to the aforesaid appeal and cross-objection are as under :The claim petition was by the cross-objection in the aforesaid C.O. (F.A.) No. 8 of 2000 before the MACT under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, inter alia, alleging that her son Nitai Debnath aged 20 years 7 months and 18 days had been done to death by an accident caused by Omni Bus No. TRS-999 on 18.8.1993. The son was coming on a bi-cycle when he was struck by a speedy bus causing instant death of the son of the claimant. The bus did not stop there, in other words, it was hit and run case. It was further alleged that the bus was insured with the United India Insurance Co. Ltd., (the appellant in MAC Appeal No. 102 of 2000) at the relevant time. It was still further alleged that the deceased who was a labourer was earning Rs. 50 per day, i.e., Rs. 1,500 per month. The amount cla...