Guwahati Court September 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.
Kushal Kumar Talukdar Vs. Chandra Prasad Goenka
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Sep-15-2004
I.A. Ansari, J.1. Based on a complaint lodged by Shri Inder Chand Goenka (since de ceased) for prosecution of the present petitioner, namely, Shri Kushal Kumar Talukdar as accused under Section 138 read with Section 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (herein after referred to as 'the N.I. Act'), C.R. Case No. 3002/2000 was registered in the Court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kamrup, Guwahati.2. In course of time, in pursuance of the summons issued, the accused-petitioner appeared, through his counsel, in the said complaint case. While the Complaint Case No. 3002(C)/2000 aforementioned was pending in the Court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kamrup, Guwahati, the complainant, Shri Inder Chand Goenka, died on 18-7-2000 and his only son, namely, Shri Chandra Prasad Goenka filed a petition, on 18-9-2000, for substituting him as a complainant in place of his deceased-father. This prayer was allowed by the learned Court below by its order, dated 18-9-2000, where upon the accused-p...
State of Tripura and anr. Vs. Amrita Bala Sen and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Sep-15-2004
Ranjan Gogoi, J.1. Both the appeals being directed against a common Judgment and order dated 07.12.2000 were heard analogously and are being disposed of by the present order.2. The facts, in brief, may be noted at the outset.The two petitioners in the writ proceeding registered as Civil Rule No. 511 of 1996 were admitted in the B.R. Ambedkar Memorial Hospital at Hapania, West Tripura on 17.6.1996. A cataract operation was performed in the left eye of each of the petitioners in the said hospital on 18.6.1996 and they were discharged from the hospital on 21.6.1996. The petitioner No. 1 in the connected writ proceeding, i.e., Civil Rule No. 557 of 1996 was admitted in the hospital on 18.6.1996; his left eye was operated on 19.6.1996 and he was discharged on 21.6.1996. Similarly, the petitioner No. 2 in the said writ proceeding was admitted in the hospital on 11.6.1996 ; her left eye was operated on 12.6.1996 and she was discharged on 24.6.1996 whereas the third petitioner was admitted in...
North Eastern Electrical Power Corp. Ltd. Vs. Hindustan Const. Company ...
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Sep-10-2004
I.A. Ansari, J.1. By an Arbitral award, dated 21.8.2001, the petitioner-Corporation was directed to pay to the respondent-Company a sum of Rs. 102.55 lakhs with simple interest thereon at the rate of 19.5% on and from 3.4.1993. The petitioner-Corporation filed, on 21.3.2002, an application Under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act of 1996') along with an application Under Section 5 of the Limitation Act seeking condonation of delay in filing the application Under Section 34. On 17.5.2002 Money Execution case No. 7(T) 2003 was registered in the Court of the learned Assistant to the Deputy Commissioner, at Shillong, on the basis of an application for execution of the award made by the respondent-Company. By the impugned Order, dated 13.5.2003, passed in Misc Arbitration Case No. 14(T)02, the learned Assistant to the Deputy Commissioner, at Shillong, allowed the application Under Section 5 of the Limitation Act made by the petitio...
Hindustan Construction Company Vs. North Eastern Electrical Power Corp ...
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Sep-10-2004
I.A. Ansari, J.1. Heard Mr. SB Mukherjee, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. S.P. Mahanta, learned counsel, for the petitioner, and Mr. VK Jindal, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. L. Lyngdoh, learned counsel, for the Opposite party.2. The challenge in this Revision is posed to the Order, dated 13.5.2003, passed, in Misc Arbitration Case No. 14(T)02, by the learned Assistant to the Deputy to the Commissioner, Shillong.3. By an Arbitral award, dated 21.8.2001, the Opposite party was directed to pay a sum of Rs. 102.55 lakhs with simple interest thereon at the rate of 19.5% on and from 3.4.1993. The Opposite party filed, on 21.3.2002, an application under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the Act of 1996) alongwith an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act seeking condonation of delay in filing the application under Section 34. On 17.5.2002 Money Execution Case No. 7(T)2003 was registered in the Court of the learned ...
Prabir Chandra Bhattacharjee Vs. State of Tripura and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Sep-10-2004
T. Vaiphei, J. 1. This bunch of writ petitions being inter-connected are disposed of by this common judgment.2. In this writ petition, the petitioner prays for setting aside the letter dated 2.4.2004 (Annexure-XXIX) issued by the respondent No. 2 for treating B.Ed, in Physical Education as the qualification for the post of Headmaster of Netaji Subhas Vidyaniketan Higher Secondary School, for quashing the tentative seniority list dated 27.11.2001 (Annexure-XV) and for counting his past service in the Mahatma Gandhi Memorial Higher Secondary School for the purpose of seniority.3. The facts of the case relevant for disposal of this writ petition may be stated. The petitioner was initially appointed on 17.7.1969 as Asstt. Teacher of Mahatma Gandhi Memorial Higher Secondary School, Agartala, which is a privately managed Govt. aided school. His appointment was approved by the respondent No. 2 on 7.10.1969. He was thereafter granted post-graduate pay scale w.e.f. 17.7.1969, which was subsequ...
Smt. Jayshri BorgohaIn Vs. State of Assam and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Sep-08-2004
A.H. Saikia, J.1. Heard Mr. G.K. Joshi, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. R.K. Joshi and Mrs. U. Chakraborty and Mr. A.K. Goswami, learned Counsel for the petitioners and Mr. D. Goswami, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate, Assam and Mr. J. Singh, learned Standing Counsel, N.F. Railway, appearing for the official respondents.2. This batch of writ petitions carries a common question of law based on same and identical fact-situation and as such all these petitions are heard analogously and being disposed of by this common judgment and order.3. The core question involved in this host of writ petitions is whether Section 27 of the Assam General Sales Tax Act, 1993 (in short, 'the Act') authorises the Government departments, while deducting taxes at source for the transfer of property in goods involved in a works contract specified in Schedule VI, to deduct taxes at source on the labour components and declared goods under Section 8(3)(iv) of the Act and goods obtained in the...
Pradip Shah Vs. State of Assam
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Sep-07-2004
D. Biswas, Acting C.J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 15.7.2003 passed by the learned Special Judge, Kokrajhar in Special Case No. 15 of 2002 convicting the appellant under Section 20(b)(1) of the NDPS Act, 1985. On conviction, the learned Special Judge sentenced the appellant to suffer Rigorous Imprisonment for 4 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 30,000/- in default, to further Rigorous imprisonment for two months.2. Shri A.S. Choudhury, learned senior counsel appeared for the appellant, while Shri B.S. Sinha, learned Public Prosecutor appeared for the respondent State.3. The appellant was prosecuted for possessing 85 packets of ganja concealed in a separate cabinet inside the hold of the truck No. WMK 8859. The truck was searched in the National Highway 31-C by Shri Ranjit Kr. Basumatary, S.I. of Police on 6.3.2002 and the aforesaid quantity of ganja was detected and seized. On completion of investigation, the Sub Inspector of Police submitted charge she...
FakaruddIn Ahmed Vs. ParbIn Sultana
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Sep-01-2004
I.A. Ansari, J.1. None has appeared on behalf of the parties. Heard Mr. F.H. Laskar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam.2. By the impugned judgment and order, dated 17.01.2002, passed in Criminal Revision No. 20/2001, the learned Sessions Judge, Morigaon, dismissed the revision, which arose out of the order, dated 17-07-2001, passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Morigaon, in MR Case No. 35/2000, Under Section 125 Cr.P.C.3. Briefly stated, facts giving rise to the order, dated 17-7-2001, are as follows :The Opposite party herein instituted, as first party, MR Case No. 35/2000 aforementioned Under Section 125 Cr.P.C, her case being that she was legally wedded wife of the second party-petitioner herein, the second party demanded Rs. 25,000/- from the first party's father and, on their failure to meet his said demand, she was driven out of her matrimonial house, she had to come to, and take shelter at, the house of her parents, she has no source of income of her own a...
Pradip Kr. Roy Vs. Ghulam Rabbani and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Sep-01-2004
I.A. Ansari, J.1. By the impugned order, dated 4.09.1997, passed in Complaint Case No. 1258C/1995, the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kamrup, Guwahati, has discharged the three accused-opposite party herein, namely, 1. Sri Pradip Kr. Roy, 2. Sri Bardhan Chandra Naga and 3. Sri Arijit Dutta of the offences allegedly committed by them Under Sections 408/420/34 IPC.2. The case of the complainant, as unfolded at the trail, may in brief, be stated as follows :-M/s. PK Trading is a partnership firm, which has authorised the complainant, Sri PR Roy, to file a complaint on behalf of the firm on the strength of a power of attorney executed by the firm. The three accused persons, namely, 1. Sri Pradip Kr. Roy, 2. Sri Bardhan Chandra Nag and 3. Sri Arijit Dutta were employees of the said firm, the accused No. 2 being the Manager of the complainant firm. From M/s Mangilal Sarmah of Boingaigaon, one of the customers of the complainant firm, the accused No. 1, namely, Sri Pradip Kr. Roy, collec...
Daler Singh Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Sep-01-2004
I.A. Ansari, J.1. Heard Mr. T. N. Srinivasna, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Mrs. N. D. Sharma, Addl. Central Govt. Standing Counsel, appearing for the respondents.2. By order, dated 27.8.2004, passed in this writ petition, it was directed that the matter would be taken up for final disposal at the motion hearing itself.3. Upon hearing the learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the materials on record, I am also of the view that this writ petition can be disposed of at the motion stage itself.4. Briefly stated, the facts, which form the background of the impugned transfer order, dated 30.4.2004, are thus : The petitioner, who is a member of the Border Security Force, is from Azara, Guwahati, and was posted at Guwahati in the year 1997. As a member of 32 Bn. BSF, the petitioner was transferred to Manipur in the year 2001. As the entire Unit of 32 Bn BSF moved to Panjipara (West Bengal), the petitioner was also, as a member of the said Battalion, transferred to, and ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »