Guwahati Court May 2005 Judgments

Sadananda Bharali Vs. Assam State Transport Corporation and ors.

Court: Guwahati

Reported in: [2005(107)FLR81]

H.N. Sarma, J.1. In all these writ petitions the common grievance of the writ petitioners are inter alia is the non-payment of service benefits to which they are entitled under the Voluntary Recurement Scheme framed by the Assam State Road Transport Corporation. As per the order of the Corporation, under which all writ petitioners served, they have been granted voluntary retirement under the said scheme.2. I have heard Mr. S. Medhi assisted by Mr. S. Borooah, for the petitioners and Ms. U. Barua, the learned Counsel for the respondent-Corporation. All the petitioners in this bunch of writ petitions, except petitioner in W.P. (C) Nos. 3856/2003, 5802/2003 and 2442/2005, have their common grievances. The necessary facts leading to the disposal of this batch of writ petitions may be summarised below. The petitioners were regular employees under the Assam State Road Transport Corporation (for short ASTC). Due to certain reasons, the Corporation suffered loss and the Corporation was facing ...

Smt. Sima Palit Vs. Pradip Kumar Palit and anr.

Court: Guwahati

T. Vaiphei, J.1. We have heard Mr. D. Guha, the learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. D. Chakraborty, the learned counsel for the respondents. The short point which fails for consideration in this appeal is whether the decree of divorce passed by the learned Additional District Judge, West Tripura. Agartala on the ground of irretrievable breakdown of marriage even after holding that the allegations of cruelty and desertion made by the respondent No. 1 against his wife were not established, is sustainable in law.2. The respondent No. 1 herein filed a petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act for dissolution of his marriage with the appellant. The case of the respondent No. 1 is that his marriage with the appellant was solemnized according to Hindu religious rites on 22 1-1991. After the marriage, they started living together as husband and wife for a period of 10 days at his residence. The respondent No. 1, who was serving as Constable in the Border Security Force, left h...

State of Meghalaya Vs. Richard Lyngdoh

Court: Guwahati

I.A. Ansari, J.1. Dr. S Marak, Medical & Health Officer lodged, as in-charge, Primary Health Centre, Sutnya, Jaintia Hills District, a written FIR, on 11.1.2001, at Khlichriat Police Station, against accused Richard Lyngdoh alleging, inter alia, that on 11.1.2001 at about 12.05 a.m., the accused aforementioned, as headman of Sukna village, broke into the Government quarter, which was in occupation and use of the informant, and started looking for the informant with the aim of assaulting him, but as the informant hid himself inside his said quarter, the accused broke open the main door of the said residential quarter, the accused also broke the window-panes of the quarter, came inside the quarter shouting that he would kill the informant and as the accused could not locate the informant, he (accused) broke all the materials inside the sitting room of the said quarter and left. Based on this FIR, Khlichriat Police Station case No. 8 (1) of 2001 (corresponding to GR Case No. 19/ 2001) un...

Krishna Mohan Jamatia Vs. State of Tripura and ors.

Court: Guwahati

T. Vaiphei, J.1. This review petition is directed against the judgment and order dated 30-7-2004 passed by this Court in W. P. (C) No. 407 of 2001 and is filed under the following facts and circumstances :--2. The petitioner filed the writ petition for directing the respondents to pay compensation for the killing of his son, Krishna Mangal Jamatia on 23-3-2001 at Kafrubari, Sough Tripura by unwarranted police firing. According to the petitioner, the respondents did not take the responsibility of the killing on the ground that the deceased was simply the victim of cross firing between them and the extremists, for which the perpetrators were not known and that the deceased himself was a collaborator of the extremists. To cut short the narration, in the wake of denial of the allegations of the petitioner by the respondents, this Court was of the view that such disputed question of facts could not be decided without taking evidence and that the matter called for enquiry by a Judicial offi...

Thingbaijam Vs. State of Manipur

Court: Guwahati

T. Nandkumar Singh, J.1. The present appeal has been filed by the accused/appellant against the judgment dated 21-10-1999 passed in S. T. Case No. 92/94/8/94/9 of 1999 by the learned Sessions Judge, Manipur East (Shri M. Binoykumar Singh, as he then was) wherein it has been held that the appellant/accused guilty and convicted him Under Section 302, IPC, and on the facts and circumstances of the case the appellant/accused was awarded life imprisonment. The learned trial Court passed his judgment dated 21-10-1999 basing primarily upon the circumstantial evidence and extra-judicial confession of the appellant./ accused. The learned trial Court was also of the firm opinion in passing the judgment dated 21-10-1999 that the death of Shri L. Mohendro Singh (deceased/victim) was homicidal and manner in which injury was inflicted was due to commission of crime of murder within the meaning of Section 300, IPC not falling under any of exceptions specified therein.2. Heard Mr. N. Kerani Singh, le...

Pradip Saikia and ors. Vs. Suwala Saikia and ors.

Court: Guwahati

A.H. Saikia, J. 1. Heard Ms. S. Senapati, learned counsel for the appellants. This appeal has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 23.12.1998 passed by the learned District Judge, Sibasagar in Misc. (P) Case No. 40/90 wherein the prayer for grant of probate of a will sought by the appellants was rejected.2. The facts in brief as gathered from a conjoint reading of the pleadings exchanged by and between the parties may be noticed. Appellants are the nephews of one Late Pakaram Saikia who was the father of the respondents. Late Pakaram Saikia died on 6.1.1990. According to the appellants, the said Saikia on 28.11.1989, before his death, executed his last Will (Ext.1) in respect of his entire movable and immovable properties of which there was a land measuring about 29 Bighas, 4 Kathas, 6 Lochas in favour of the appellants. After the death of late Saikia, the appellants moved the learned District judge, Sibasagar by filing an application under Section 376 of the Indian Suc...

Ramjan Ali and anr. Vs. State of Assam

Court: Guwahati

A.H. Saikia, J1. Heard Mr. H.R.A. Choudhury, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. M.U Mandal, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. P. Bora, learned PP, Assam.2. This criminal revision petition has been directed against the order dated 10.8.2004 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Nagaon in Sessions Case No. 138 (N)/03 by which the petition preferred by the informants/petitioners under Section 319 Cr.P.C. praying for issuance of summons to certain persons named in the petition itself alleged to have been involved in the commission of the offence in question, was rejected for the time being.3. For the sake of convenience, the impugned order dated 10.8.2004 may be extracted as under :'ORDER10.8.2004Both accused are present. Summon to N/O and I/O have been received back without service. Issue summon to them as per the report of police.Seen the petition No. 439 filed by Ramjan Ali praying to issue summon to Khairul, Forjul, Jalil Munchi, Jahirul, Habibullah, Abdul M...

New Manas Tea Estate (P.) Ltd. Vs. Bargaon Tea Co. (P.) Ltd.

Court: Guwahati

B.K. Sharma, J.1. Heard Mr. B.R. Dey, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. A.K. Paul, advocate for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. A. Sarma, learned counsel assisted by Mr. M. Sarma, advocate for the respondent. The matter is taken up for final disposal at the motion state itself as agreed to by the learned counsel for the parties.2. By this writ application, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 30.11.2004 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Sr. Division) No. 1, Guwahati rejecting the review application filed in respect of an order dated 3.3.2004 by which the written statement filed by the defendant, the present petitioner in a Money Suit was refused to be accepted on ground of expiry of the period prescribed for filing the same.3. The facts material for the purpose of disposal of this writ petition are that the respondent herein as the plaintiff has instituted Money Suit No. 125/2003 in the Court of learned Civil Judge (Sr. Division) No. 1 Guwahati against the present petiti...

Jadu Thakur and ors. Vs. on the Death of Kedar Prasad Alias Kedar Pras ...

Court: Guwahati

H.N. Sarma, J.1. This second appeal arises out of the judgment and decree passed in T.A. No. 7/1989 dated 6.5.1994 by the learned Assistant District Judge, Dhubri reversing the judgment and decree passed by the learned Munsiff No. 1 Dhubri in T.S. No. 551/82 and thereby dismissing the suit of the plaintiff/appellant.2. The plaintiff filed the aforesaid title suit for declaration of right title and interest of the plaintiff over the suit land measuring 2 Katha 5 dhur covered by tauji No. 116 of Gauripur Estate situated at Bidyapara, Dhubri town in the then district Goalpara. The plaintiff also has prayed for declaration that the revenue records where in the names of the defendants, have been entered, should be corrected by putting the names of the plaintiff. There was also a prayer for injunction. It is alleged in the plaint that the predecessor of the plaintiff, namely, Mongara Thakur and Binda Thakur were the owners of the suit land wherein, the plaintiff has got their possession hav...

Mejum Karga Vs. State of Arunachal Pradesh and ors.

Court: Guwahati

B.K. Sharma, J.1. The petitioner, an Upper Division Clerk (UDC) working in the department of Rural Development, Govt. of Arunachal Pradesh, has, by way of this writ proceeding, challenged the legality and validity of the fixation of seniority of the respondent No. 3, an UDC in the same department above her. Although the petition was filed with limited grounds towards such a challenge, in due course with the appearance of the respondent No. 3 in the proceeding by way of filing counter affidavit, the petitioner has brought certain new facts in her reply affidavits filed in respect of the counter affidavit of the respondent No. 3 as well as the counter affidavit filed by the official respondents. An additional affidavit has also been filed by the respondent No. 3 to the reply affidavit of the petitioner. Amidst such pleadings, both the petitioner and the respondent No. 3 have reduced their respective facts of the case by submitting their respective list of dates with brief facts, which a...