Guwahati Court September 2006 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.
Satyaranjan Debbarma Vs. Tripura Tribal Areas Autonomous District Coun ...
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Sep-06-2006
A.B. Pal, J.1. The challenge in the above two writ petitions is to the transfer order No. F.112(9)-ADC/EDN/ESTT/05/1805-1872 dated 12.8.2005 passed by the Principal Officer (Education), Tripura Tribal Areas Autonomous District Council (for short, the Autonomous District Council), an autonomous body of the tribals constituted under Sixth Schedule of the Constitution, whereby 61 Assistant Teachers and Kokbarak teachers including the two petitioners herein were transferred to the schools within the Autonomous District. Both the above noted cases having arisen against a same transfer order under similar circumstances are proposed to be disposed of by this common judgment.2. In W.P. (C) No. 313 of 2005, the petitioner Sri Satyaranjan Debbarma was appointed Kokbarak teacher on 5.1.1993 by the Principal Officer (Education) of the Autonomous District Council, the second respondent herein. He joined on 15.1.1993 and was posted at Anantpara Junior Basic School under Inspectorate of Schools, Amb...
Hemadhar Hazarika Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Sep-06-2006
1. This is yet another case where an unfortunate parent approaches this Court complaining of custodial killing of his young son, Bhupen Hazarika alias Binay Sarma, aged about 26 years. Law's delays did not deter him to pursue the matter to its logical end.2. The sordid play gets unfolded as under:The petitioner on an earlier occasion preferred WP (C) No. 3/99 praying this Court to issue a Writ of Habeas Corpus directing the same respondents herein to produce his son, Bhupen Hazarika, in this Court. The aforesaid petition was filed, according to the petitioner, when the killing of his son was mired in confusion and controversy. The Division Bench of this Court vide its order dated 1-10-99 disposed of the said writ petition as under:A bare perusal of the affidavit filed by the respondents Nos. 1 to 4 will show that the claim made by the writ petitioner is not correct. No doubt. it is a fact that Bhupen Hazarika alias Binoy Sarma died in the army custody and as to whether he is entitled ...
Apurba Ballav Goswami Vs. State of Assam and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Sep-05-2006
I.A. Ansari, J.1. Subject to what conditions withdrawal from prosecution can be permitted by Section 321 of the Code of Criminal Procedure ('the Code') and what roles the Public Prosecutor plays in seeking withdrawal from prosecution and while dealing with an application made under Section 321 of the Code, what powers and duties of a court are, are some of the vital questions, which the present revision petition has thrown up for determination.2. This revision is directed against the order, dated 10.6.2002, passed, in GR Case No. 1099/2000, by the Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate (S), Golaghat, permitting withdrawal of the case by prosecution and acquitting the accused-opposite party of the offence allegedly committed by them under Section 51 of the Wild Life Protection Act, 1972.3. Before I discuss the facts, which have given rise to the present writ petition, it is, in the context of the facts of the present case, apposite to point out the basic principles governing exercise of ju...
Assam State Warehousing Corporation Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax and ...
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Sep-05-2006
D. Biswas, J.1. All these appeals under Section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 are directed against a common order dated May 31, 2002, passed by the learned Tribunal, Guwahati Bench, in I.T.A. Nos. 282 to 287 of 1998. The appeals relate to the assessment years 1983-84 to 1994-95.The questions of law common to all the appeals are as follows:1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the entire expenditure incurred by the appellant-assessee of its business is to be allowed from the taxable receipts and no allocation of expenditure is permissible as held by the hon'ble apex court in CIT v. Indian Bank Ltd. : [1965]56ITR77(SC) ; CIT v. Maharashtra Sugar Mills Ltd. : [1971]82ITR452(SC) and Rajasthan State Warehousing Corporation v. CIT : [2000]242ITR450(SC) ?2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, all income from ancillary activities except supervision charges and miscellaneous receipts are exempt under Section 10(29) of the Income-tax Act, 1961...
Amrita Das Vs. Mukul Das
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Sep-04-2006
T. Vaiphei, J.1. The validity of the judgment and order dated 2.8.2004 passed by the learned Additional Deputy Commissioner, Shillong in Matrimonial Case No. 1 (T) of 2004 granting a decree of divorce to the respondent by dissolving the marriage between the appellant and the respondent is called into question in this appeal.2. Heard Mr. N. Mozika, the learned Counsel for the appellant and also heard Mr. H.R. Nath, the learned Counsel for the respondent.3. To appreciate the controversy involved in this appeal, a brief narration of uncontroverted facts may be apposite. The respondent herein filed an application under Section 13(1)(i) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 before the learned Addl. Deputy Commissioner, Shillong for dissolution of his marriage with the appellant. The respondent got married with the appellant on 9.12.2002 at Karimganj, Assam in accordance with Hindu rites and rituals, whereafter they resided at Shillong for a brief period. After their marriage, the appellant left...
Hari Singh Bhamrah Vs. State of Assam and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Sep-01-2006
H.N. Sarma, J.1. This revision petition arises out of an order passed in Money Execution Case No. 5/2000 dated 30.8.2005 by the learned Civil Judge (Sr. Division) Golaghat rejecting the prayer of the decreeholder-petitioner claiming an amount of Rs. 5,22,548.70 alleged to be still due to him in terms of order dated 3.3.1992 amending decree that was passed in Money Suit No. 6/88.2. Heard Mr. B. Banerjee, learned Counsel for the decree holder/ petitioner and Mr. P.S. Deka, learned Junior Government Advocate for the Judgment debtor-State.3. The plaintiff-decreeholder filed the above suit claiming compensation on account of the damage of a deluxe bus that was caused due to burning by miscreants which was under requisition of the State-respondents.4. The suit was contested by the defendants by filing written statement and ultimately vide judgment and decree dated 16.12.1991 the learned Assistant District Judge, Golaghat decreed the suit decreeing a sum of Rs. 2,03,925.50 against the State...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›