Guwahati Court August 2003 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.
State of Assam and ors. Vs. SirajuddIn and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Aug-21-2003
I.A. Ansari, J.1. The second appeal has arisen out of the judgment and decree, dated 22.8.1994, passed by the learned Assistant District Judge, Karimganj, in Title Appeal No. 27 of 1990, whereby the appeal was dismissed on contest without cost.2. This second appeal has raised a short, but important question of law, namely, as to whether a decree, which is drawn up following pronouncement of judgment by taking recourse to Order 8 Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure (hereinafter referred to as 'the Code') is appealable.3. I have perused the materials on record including the impugned judgment and decree. I have heard Mr. D. Goswami, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate, Assam, for the appellants, and Mr. AK Goswami, learned counsel appearing for the respondents.4. For the sake of brevity, let me quote hereinbelow Order 8 Rule 10 of the Code, which reads as follows : '10. Procedure when party fails to present written statement called for by Court: where any party from whom a ...
Antique India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State of Assam and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Aug-20-2003
D. Biswas, J.1. By this common judgment, Writ Petition (C) No. 7936 of 2001, Writ Petition (C) No. 7939 of 2001, Writ Petition (C) No. 8165 of 2001, Writ Petition (C) No. 7938 of 2001, Writ Petition (C) No. 8273 of 2001 and Writ Petition (C) No. 1090 of 2002 are being disposed of. In all these petitions, the order dated 13.11.2001 issued by the respondent authority is in challenge. By this order, the Respondent No. 1 awarded the contract for supply of Potable Alcohol/Rectified Spirit to the Tinsukia Excise Warehouse in favour of the Respondent No. 3, Shri Prassana Dutta.2. By the order dated 13.11.2001, the Under Secretary to the Government of Assam, Excise Department informed the Commissioner of Excise that decision has been taken to award the contract for wholesale supply of Potable Alcohol/Rectified Spirit (Grade-1) to the Tinsukia Excise Warehouse with Mr. Prasanna Dutta of Sibsagar at his quoted rate of Rs. 10.45 paise per L.P.L. for the term 2001-2004.3. The aforesaid decision o...
Mir HussaIn Vs. Musst Hamida Khatoon and anr.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Aug-20-2003
I.A. Ansari, J. 1. The order under challenge in the present revision was passed, on 15.2.2000, by the learned Additional Session Judge, Nagaon, in C.M. Case No. 33 (N) 99, whereby the order dated 29.1.1999, passed by the learned Executive Magistrate, Nagaon, in MR Case No. 215/97 under Sections 145/146 Cr.P.C., declaring the possession of the disputed land in favour of the first party, who is the petitioner in the present revision petition, was set aside.2. Briefly stated, the material facts giving rise to this revision are as follows ; The first party instituted MR Case No. 215/97 aforementioned seeking declaration of his possession over the disputed land. The second party, who is the Opposite Party Nos. 1 and 2 in the present revision, resisted the claim of the first party. During the course of the proceeding, evidence adduced by both the parties were recorded and by the order, dated 29.1.1999, aforementioned, the learned Magistrate declared possession of the disputed land in favou...
Kamal UddIn and anr. Vs. State of Assam
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Aug-20-2003
A.H. Saikia, J.1. Heard Mr. A. K. Goswami, learned counsel for the appellants and Mr. F. H. Laskar, learned PP, Assam.2. That the conviction of the accused/appellants under Section 304, Part-II, IPC and the subsequent sentence of 3 years rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000 in default 2 months simple imprisonment imposed by the judgment and order dated 9.7.2001 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Karimganj in Sessions Case No. 74/96 is the subject-matter of challenge in this Criminal Appeal.3. The prosecution case, briefly stated, is that on the evening of 1.9.1995 when the 5 accused persons namely, Jamal Uddin, Kamal Uddin, the appellant No. 1, Jabbar Mian, Abdul Gafur, the appellant No. 2 and Kabir Uddin were playing carom in the shop house of Abdul Gafur, the appellant No. 2, at Telakona, the informant, P.W. 1, Makai Mia who, on hearing the Ajan, was on his way to offer Mugrib Namaj in the Masjid situated in the same bazaar seeing them playing carom, requested the ...
North Eastern Electric Power Corporation Limited Vs. Khoda Talley and ...
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Aug-20-2003
A.H. Saikia, J.1. Since this batch of writ appeals carries common question of law based on similar and identical question of facts the same is taken up together for hearing and being disposed of finally by this common judgment and order.2. We have heard Mr. M.Z. Ahmed, learned counsel appearing for the appellant and Mr. B. Banerjee, learned Sr. Govt. Advocate, Arunachal Pradesh and Mr. C. Baruah, learned Sr. counsel assisted by Mr. R. Saikia learned counsel appearing for the private respondents at length.3. The imposition of financial liabilities upon the appellant-North Eastern Electrical Power Corporation Ltd. (for short 'NEEPCO') jointly with the State of Arunachal Pradesh and the Public Works Department to the Govt. of Arunachal Pradesh (hereinafter referred to as 'the P.W. Department') by the learned single Judge in rendering the related impugned Judgments and orders for payment of outstanding contractors' bills accrued to the contractors/private respondents for execution of the ...
R.N. Omprakash Anand and anr. Vs. State of Assam and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Aug-18-2003
P.G. Agarwal, J.1. Heard Mr. G.K. Joshi, learned Senior Advocate for the petitioner and Mr. K.C. Mahanta, learned Government Advocate.2. The petitioner is a dealer, dealing in crockery, etc., and for the period ending March 31, 1994 he submitted his return under the Assam General Sales Tax Act, 1993, for short 'the AGST Act'. Thereafter, vide the assessment order dated June 27, 1995 the assessing authority raised further demand of Rs. 62,121 and levied penal interest to the extent of Rs. 28,545. The petitioner filed a revision before the Additional Commissioner of Taxes but the revisional authority vide the order dated May 31, 1997 dismissed the revision. Hence, the present writ petition.3. The case of the petitioner is that vide, annexure-I, dated January 28, 1993, the Superintendent of Taxes directed the petitioner to make a payment of security money Under Section 7(1) of the Assam Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1956 to the tune of Rs. 3,00,000 and another sum of Rs. 25,000 under the Cent...
Dilip Kumar Paul and ors. Vs. State of Assam and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Aug-18-2003
Ranjan Gogoi, J. 1. Heard Mr. N. Dhar, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. B.J. Talukdar, learned Government Advocate, Assam.2. The petitioners were appointed as Junior Engineers under the Directorate of Panchayat and Rural Development, Government of Assam by an order dated 26.11.1986. The aforesaid appointments were made under the provisions of the Assam Public Service (Ad hoc) Appointment Rules, 1986 (since repealed). The petitioners joined service and as it would be evident from the materials brought on record, they were granted increments of pay from time to time by orders passed by the concerned authority. Thereafter, by an order dated 31.1.1990, the petitioners' services were regularized on the recommendation of the Assam Public Service Commission. As by a series of identical orders dated 2.3.1993, the petitioners were granted the initial pay in the revised scale of pay applicable to Junior Engineers effective, from 1.1.1989 and the benefits of increments earned had not...
K.N. Traders and anr. Vs. State of Assam and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Aug-18-2003
P.G. Agarwal, J.1. Heard Mr. G.K. Joshi, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner and Mr. K.C. Mahanta, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate for the respondent-State.In this application under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner has challenged the suo motu order of revision passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Taxes, Tinsukia Zone, Tinsukia, under Section 36(1) of the Assam General Sales Tax Act, 1993 vide order dated October 30, 1995.2. The petitioner is a registered dealer under the Act and he filed his return for the period September 30, 1990 and March 31, 1991 whereupon the Superintendent of Taxes, Tinsukia, made the assessment. Subsequently the suo motu revision was initiated and the orders of assessment were set aside and as per the order passed by the revisional authority, fresh assessments were completed and demands were raised. The petitioner has challenged the order passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Taxes, Tinsukia, on suo motu revision as well as the...
Mosoraf Ali Laskar Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Aug-18-2003
Ranjan Gogoi, J. 1. All the three writ petitions being interconnected, have been taken up together for hearing and are being disposed of by this common judgment and order.2. I have heard Mr. N. Dhar, learned counsel for the writ petitioner in CR6669/98 and WP(C) 4083/2000 as well as Mrs. M. Hazarika, learned counsel on behalf of the Management Respondents in the aforesaid two cases. She has also been heard in support of the challenge made by the Management in the third case, i.e., WP(C)4077/2002.3. A brief recital of the facts must be made to indicate how the controversy in the present case has developed. The petitioner workman in CR6669/ 98 was charge-sheeted for remaining absent on as many as 120 days on 59 different occasions during the period 1.1.1996 to 15.12.1996. The charge-sheet in question is dated 6.1.1997. An enquiry was conducted and the petitioner having been found to be guilty of the charges levelled, was imposed with the punishment of reduction in rank, which punishmen...
Uco Bank Vs. Monoranjan Paul
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Aug-18-2003
P.P. Naolekar, C.J. 1. The plaintiff petitioner UCO Bank has filed the suit for recovery of an amount of Rs. 42,791.41P along with interest against the defendant-respondent Shri Monoranjan Paul. The suit was proceeded against the defendant ex parte and was fixed for hearing on 8.12.98. On that date the plaintiff's counsel appeared and asked for time, but the suit was dismissed by the trial Court exercising powers under Order 9 Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Later on an application was filed for setting aside the order of dismissal, which would be purported to be under Order 9 Rule 4 CPC. The trail Court dismissed the application on the ground that the adjournment was sought for on that date on the ground of transfer of the Bank Manager, but the parties have not produced any transfer order along with the application nor the application is being supported by an affidavit of any Bank Officer.2. Learned counsel Ms. Deboleena Choudhury, appearing for the petitioner has taken me thr...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »