Guwahati Court August 2004 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.
Mustt. Samdabibi and ors. Vs. Assam Board of Revenue and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Aug-31-2004
Amitava Roy, J.1. The judgment and order dated 4.8.1995 passed by the learned Assam Board of Revenue (hereafter referred to as the Board) in Appeal case No. 170RA(C)/98 is in challenge in the instant petition.2. I have heard Mr. S.A. Laskar, Advocate for the petitioners and Mr. Ahmed, Advocate for the private respondent. Mr. Thakur appeared for the State respondents.3. The facts of the case, briefly stated, are that the respondent No. 6, Mussabir Ali Mazumdar had filed an application for perfect partition of the land measuring 25 Bighas 5 Kathas 2 Chattaks claiming a share of 12 Bighas 12 Kathas 9 Chattaks therein. In the application that was filed for the said purpose before the Sub-Divisional Officer (Collector), Hailakandi and registered as P.P. Case No. 11/1983-84, by order dated 5.2.1987, the prayer was allowed. Being aggrieved, the predecessor in interest of the writ petitioners took the matter before the Additional Deputy Commissioner, Cachar, Silchar, and a proceeding was regi...
ikram Ali Vs. Mumtaz Begum
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Aug-27-2004
I.A. Ansari, J.1. This revision is directed against the order, dated 24-12-2001, passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sonitpur, in Misc. Case No. 32/2002, Under Section 125 Cr.P.C., directing the second party-petitioner herein to pay maintenance allowance @ Rs. 500/- to the first party-opposite party-herein for her maintenance and a sum of Rs. 500 as maintenance allowance for their minor child with effect from the date of passing of the order.2. Heard Mr. A.H. Laskar, learned counsel for the second party-petitioner, and Mr. P. Mahanta, learned counsel for the second party-opposite party.3. In this revision, it has not been agitated that the evidence on record were not sufficient to grant maintenance as has been done by the impugned order. What is, however, contended is that the second party-petitioner could not adduce evidence on account of the fact that he had to accompany with his aunt to Patna for operation of her fractured leg and, on returning him, he conta...
Nilam Devi Bagaria Vs. Vimal Kr. Todi
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Aug-27-2004
I.A. Ansari, J.1. By the impugned order dated 30.10.2003, passed in Complaint Case No. 26/2003, the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sonitpur, Tezpur, while taking cognizance of offences under Section 138 read with Section 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the NI Act') against the accused-petitioner and one Pawan Kumar More, directed issuance of summons to the accused-petitioner. With the help of the revision present, the petitioner, who is an accused in the said Complaint Case, has sought for setting aside the impugned order and also for quashing the entire proceeding of the Complaint Case No. 26/ 2003 aforementioned.2. I have heard Mr. P Bora, learned counsel for the accused-petitioner, and Mr. JM Choudhury, learned senior counsel, assisted by Mr. BM Choudhury, learned counsel for the opposite party. I have also heard Mr. FH Laskar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam.3. The material facts, as emerge from the record, and the various stages,...
Anwar Ali Vs. Mozibul Hoque
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Aug-27-2004
I.A. Ansari, J.1. The deceased, Darjina Begum, was the wife of the accused-petitioner, Anwar Ali. Following the death of his daughter, Darjina Begum, her father, namely, Md. Mozibul Hoque, lodged an FIR at Paltan Bazar Police Station alleging, inter alia, that the said deceased was subjected to cruelty on her failure and, On the failure of her parents to meet demands of dowry raised from the end of the accused-petitioner and died under suspicious circumstances. Based on this FIR, All Women P.S. Case No. 13/2001, Under Section 304(B)/34 IPC, was registered. Thereafter, the said Md. Mozibul Hoque i.e. the opposite party herein, lodged a complaint in the Court of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kamrup, which gave rise to Complaint Case No. 2172/2001, wherein, while repeating his allegations that his daughter, namely, Darjina Begaum, had been subjected to cruelty on account of her inability to meet the demands for dowry raised by the accused-petitioner, the complainant-opposite par...
Apurba Poddar and anr. Vs. State of Assam
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Aug-26-2004
I.A. Ansari, J.1. In the offence report, which gave rise to CR Case No. 308c/2001 of the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kamrup, Guwahati, the case of the complainant, namely, Khagendra Nath Goswami, Food Inspector (Senior) was, in brief, thus : 29.11.1999, the complainant, accompanied by his office peon, visited the premises of M/s Bichitra Traders, situated at Fancy Bazar, Guwahati, and met there the accused-petitioner No. 1, namely, Apurba Podda, who disclosed his identity as Manager of the said business concern with the accused-petitioner No. 2, namely, Puspa Rani Poddar as the proprietress thereof. Suspecting the quality of the spice found kept stored for sale for human consumption, at the said premises, under the brand name 'Curry Power (Cook me Brand)', the complainant served a notice, in Form VI, to the accused-petitioner No. 1 in order to take sample of the said curry powder for analysis. The complainant, then, purchased 12 sealed packets of the said curry powder,...
Smt. Jaswant Kaur Sehgal and ors. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax and o ...
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Aug-25-2004
Amitava Roy, J.1. These appeals arise out of the common judgment and order dated May 12, 1997 (see , passed in the aforementioned civil rules. The factual setting for all the writ petitions is the same and as common questions of law based thereon had arisen for adjudication, the appeals were heard together and are disposed of by this common judgment and order.2. We have heard Mr. G. K. Joshi, senior advocate, assisted by Mr. R. K. Joshi and Mrs. U. Chakravarty, advocate, for the appellants/writ petitioners and Dr. A. K. Saraf, senior advocate, assisted by Ms. N. Agarwal, advocate, for the respondent/Revenue.3. Briefly stated, the facts necessary to be taken note of for comprehending the competing arguments of the parties are that the appellants/writ petitioners are residents of Thangal Bazar, Imphal, in the State of Manipur and are existing assessees under the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereafter referred to as 'the Act'), enjoying income from house property, share of profit from their res...
Samar Bhowmik Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Aug-24-2004
A.H. Saikia, J.1. Heard Mr. P.K. Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioner and also heard Mr. H. Rahman, learned Senior C.G.S.C. appearing on behalf of the Union of India - respondents.2. By this writ petition, the petitioner has assailed the judgment and order dated 15.3.2000 passed by the learned Members, Central Administrative Tribunal, Guwahati Bench, (for short 'the Tribunal') in OA No. 66/98 dismissing the application filed by the petitioner raising a grievance against the order of compulsory retirement imposed upon the petitioner, by way of penalty vide order dated 21.9.1995 rendered by the appellate authority on appeal preferred by the petitioner against an order dated 31.1.1995 issued by the disciplinary authority removing him from service on the basis of initiation of a disciplinary proceeding against him under Rule 14 of the Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal Rules,) 1965, (for short 'the Rules').3. The facts leading to filing of the writ petition i...
Bani Kanta Sarma and ors. Vs. Assam Board of Revenue and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Aug-24-2004
1. Heard Mr. B.M. Sarma, learned Counsel for the appellants as well as Mr. C.K. Sarma Barua, learned Senior counsel assisted by Mr. A. Das, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of Respondent No. 3 and Respondent No. 4 and also heard Ms. A. Hazarika, learned Additional Sr. Govt. Advocate appearing for the official respondents.2. This writ appeal before us has been carried from the judgment and order dated 6.3.2003 passed by the learned Single Judge in C.R. No. 3228/97 dismissing the writ petition preferred by the appellants as writ petitioners who moved the Writ Court assailing the judgment and order dated 10.6.1997 passed by the learned Member, Assam Board of Revenue, Guwahati in two appeals being Nos. R.A. 55(K)/93 and R.A. 138(K)/93. The moot question raised herein is as to whether under Section 15 of the Assam State Acquisition of Lands belonging to Religious and Charitable Institution of Public Nature Act, 1959 (for short, 'the Act'), the land acquired under the Act can be settled ...
Bazaloni Group Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Aug-24-2004
P.P. Naolekar, C.J.1. The question for determination in these appeals lies in a narrow compass, but it involves a question of considerable nicety under the provisions of the Indian income-tax laws. It is in effect, whether in the computation of the composite income derived from sale of tea grown and manufactured by the seller and exported out of India under Section 2(1A) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act of 1961'), read with Rule 8 of the Income-tax Rules, 1962 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules of 1962'), the deduction under Section 80HHC in respect of profits derived from export of tea out of India should be allowed as per permissible deduction before apportionment of non-agricultural income and agricultural income under Rule 8 of the Rules of 1962 and thereafter the income so computed, as if it is a business income, is to be apportioned on the basis of 40 per cent being non-agricultural income and 60 per cent, being the agricultural income.2. The ...
Hem Chandra Bhuyan Vs. State of Assam and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Aug-20-2004
D. Biswas, J. 1. During the year 2000, the writ petitioner was holding the post of Superintending Engineer, P.W.D. In addition, he was also holding the office of the Additional Chief Engineer (C) temporarily. A select list was prepared on 13.9.2000 for promotion to the post of Additional Chief Engineer. The petitioner was placed at Serial No. 2 of that list dated 13.9.2000. The said select list dated 13.9.2000 was prepared on the basis of criteria adopted in the meeting held on 13.5.1994 where Secretaries of various technical Departments were present.2. One Shri Bhabani Choudhury filed Writ Petition (C) No. 5756/2000 challenging the select list dated 13.9.2000. The said writ petition was dismissed by the learned Single Judge on 12.4.2001. A Division Bench of this Court allowed the appeal preferred against the judgment and the learned Single Judge, quashed the select list dated 13.9.2000 for not having been prepared in accordance with Rule 13 of the Assam Engineering (P.W.D.) Service R...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »