Guwahati Court January 2007 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.
Khangenbam Mani Singh and ors. Vs. Khangenbam Sachikumar Singh @ Iboto ...
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Jan-11-2007
B.D. Agarwal, J.1. The revision application stands restored to file.2. The revision petitioners are the judgment-debtors in Execution Case No. 1 of 2002. The petitioners are challenging the order dated 25.03.2003 passed by the learned Civil Judge, Junior Division, Imphal East, whereby the learned Judge has rejected the objection of the judgment debtor No. 1. The said objection was filed in the Executing Court against the notice of execution of the decree, purportedly under Order XXI, Rule 22 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (shortly, the 'CPC’ hereinafter).3. I have heard the arguments of Ph. Dolen, learned Counsel for the petitioners, Shri Th. Modhu Singh, learned Counsel appeared on behalf of the decree-holder/respondent. I have also perused the impugned order and other documents filed with the revision application and the connected miscellaneous applications.4. An eviction suit was filed by the respondent in the year 1975. The suit was registered as O.S. No. 14 of 1975. A...
Ram Prasad Koiri and anr. Vs. Krishna Kumar Goala and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Jan-11-2007
Aftab Hussain Saikia, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.2. The substantial questions of law so framed in this Second Appeal at the time of admission are as follows:1. Whether the matter of cancellation of allotment certificate for violation of terms and conditions thereof being a matter within the purview of Sections 154(1)(s)(m) of the Assam Land and Revenue Regulation, 1886 the lower Court was justified in holding that the Civil Court had the jurisdiction to try the instant suit?2. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the jurisdiction of the Civil Court is barred under the provision of Section 154 of the Assam Land and Revenue Regulation, 1886?3. Whether the lower appellate Court was legally correct in holding that the land of the plaintiff maintainable under the law?3. The plaintiff/respondent herein instituted a title suit being T.S. No. 100/94 before the learned Munsiff No. 1, Hailakandi basically praying for a decree declaring that:(a) the plaintiff was a...
Nibaran Chandra Das Vs. State of Tripura and anr.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Jan-11-2007
A.B. Pal, J.1. The petitioner Nibaran Chandra Das while working as Accountant in the Social Welfare Department under the respondents since 08.09.90, was placed under suspension in contemplation of a disciplinary proceeding. The suspension continued for 15 months. Thereafter he was reinstated. However, on 28.02.2001 a common proceeding under Rule 18 of the Central Civil Service (Classification Control and Appeal) Rules 1965 (for short C.C.S/C.C.A. Rules) against the petitioner and one Prasanta Debbarma, the Inspector of Schools at the relevant time, was drawn. Manipulation of certain tender documents by way of over-writing and correction for the benefit of some tenderers was the specific charge against the petitioner. The charge was found to be proved in the departmental inquiry where-upon on 31.01.2003 the disciplinary authority imposed on the petitioner a penalty of reduction of pay by 5(five) increments from Rs. 8975 to Rs. 8100. The said proceeding was issued providing that the Gov...
Nagen Baruah Vs. Assam State Transport Corpn. and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Jan-11-2007
B.K. Sharma, J.1. The petitioner, who was a driver under the respondent-Corporation, is aggrieved by the order of removal from service, which was so passed, pursuant to a departmental proceeding against him.2. The departmental proceeding against the petitioner was initiated firstly by placing him under suspension by Annexure-'B' order dated 20.6.2000 and thereafter, by issuing charge sheet dated 10.10.2000 under Rule 9 of the Assam Services (Discipline & Appeal) Rules, 1964. The departmental proceeding was in respect of the death of the conductor of the bus which the petitioner had driven. Altogether 4 charges had been leveled against the petitioner, but in effect, there was only one charge as could be gathered from the charges and the statement of allegation. Although the charge is stated to be driving of the vehicle carelessly and negligently, but on a reading of contents of the charges coupled with the statement of allegation, truly speaking, there was no such distinct and definite...
Bipul Kumar Vs. State of Assam and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Jan-10-2007
Hrishikesh Roy, J.1. Heard Mr. U.K. Nair, learned advocate for the petitioner, Ms B. Goyal, learned advocate representing the State and Mr. B.C. Das, learned senior advocate for the respondent No. 2.The present petition has been filed by a Grade-IV appointee in the establishment of District & Sessions Judge, Barpeta making a grievance of non-payment of his salary from the month of January, 2006, The petitioner has prayed for a direction for payment of his arrear salary as well as for further direction for ensuring timely disbursal of his salary and allowances by the respondent-authorities.2. The writ petitioner on the basis of appointment order dated 20.01.1998 (Annexure-1) issued by the District and Sessions Judge, Kamrup, Guwahati was appointed as a 'Mali' at a fixed salary of Rs. 900/- per month. It is averred that the said appointment had been made as per the practice and procedure followed for a long time whereby under the establishment of the District and Sessions Judge, engagem...
Dewan Ram Boro Vs. State of Assam and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Jan-09-2007
Amitava Roy, J.1. The petitioner assails the notification dated 22.11.2006, whereby the respondent No. 3, according to him have been illegally and arbitrarily allowed to hold the charge of the post of Director of Elementary Education, Assam. This Court issued notice on 6.12.2006, directing service of notice on the said respondent by registered post. The petitioner, was also granted the liberty to serve the notice personally on respondent No. 3. By an affidavit filed on 15.12.2006, the petitioner has affirmed on oath that a copy of the writ petition had been served on the said respondent. Annexure-A to the affidavit bears out the said assertion. The respondent No. 3, however, has not entered appearance. In view of the urgency expressed at the Bar, the petition has been taken up for final disposal at the admission stage.2. I have heard Mr. N. Dutta, Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. K. Goswami, Advocate for the petitioner and Mr. M.K. Choudhury, Senior Standing Counsel, Education Departme...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Shyamal Bhattacharjee
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Jan-09-2007
D. Biswas, J.1. This appeal by the Revenue is directed against the judgment dated June 20, 2003, passed by the learned Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Guwahati Bench, Guwahati, in I.T.A. No. 173 (Gauhati) of 1998. The appeal was admitted for hearing on the following questions of law:1. Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the assessment order under Section 144 of the Income-tax Act was barred by limitation ?2. Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the approval of the Range DCIT taken by the Assessing Officer vitiated the assessment proceeding and consequent thereof the assessment order issued by the Assessing Officer ?2. We have heard Mr. U. Bhuyan, learned Counsel for the appellant, and also Dr. Saraf, learned senior counsel for the respondent-assessee.3. The dispute relates to the assessment year 1993-94. The Assessing Officer made assessment under Section 144 of the Income-tax Act computing the total income at Rs. 19,48,296 and initiated proceedings un...
N. Malla (Prof.) and anr. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Jan-09-2007
D. Biswas, J.1. Both the appeals arise out of a common judgment and order dated 13.9.2002 passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court in WP(C) Nos. 174 (SH)/01 and 233 (SH)/01. The Writ Appeal No. 33(SH)/2002 is also being disposed of by this common judgment which has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 7.10.2002 passed in W.P.(C) No. 225(SH)/1999.We have heard Ms. A. Paul, learned Counsel for the appellants and Mrs. S. R. Sen, learned Counsel for the respondents.2. The writ petitioner in WP(C) 174 (SH) 01, on conclusion of disciplinary proceedings initiated against him, was imposed with the penalty of stoppage of increments for five years, penalty debarring him from the membership of any statutory body and the penalty imposing restriction upon him in holding higher position under the CAS etc. The orders passed by the authority have been challenged in this petition. The writ petitioner in WP(C) 233 (SH)/01 was imposed with the penalty of compulsory retirement from s...
Management of Food Corpn. of India Vs. Central Govt. Industrial Tribun ...
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Jan-09-2007
Amitava Roy, J.1. The award dated 19.08.1996 passed by the Central Government Industrial Tribunal, Calcutta, (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal) rendered in Reference No. 42/1981 directing reinstatement of the persons involved in the industrial dispute with back wages as indicated herein constitutes the subject matter of the instant proceeding. Being aggrieved thereby, the Food Corporation of India, Guwahati, (hereafter referred to as the Corporation) is before this Court seeking redress.2. I have heard Mr. P.K. Roy, learned Standing Counsel for the Corporation assisted by Mr. S.K. Chakraborty, Advocate. By application No. Misc. Case 57/2000, seven such persons had prayed for their impleadment as party respondent. On a consideration of the statements made, the prayer is hereby allowed. The applicants would stand impleaded as respondents 3 to 9. I have heard Mr. I. Hussain, Advocate for the newly impleaded respondents.3. The facts in brief leading to the filing of the instant pet...
Smt. Bandana Gogoi Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax and anr.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Jan-09-2007
D. Biswas, J.1. This appeal under Section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, directed against the order dated February 27, 2004, passed by the learned Income-tax Tribunal, Guwahati Bench, Guwahati, in I.T.A. No. 73 (Gau) of 2001 and C. O. No. 20 (Gau) of 2001 has been admitted for hearing by the order dated July 1, 2004. The question formulated was recast at the time of hearing. The question reads as follows:Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the decision of the learned Tribunal is not erroneous in holding that non-issuance of notice under Section 143(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, did not invalidate the assessment relating to the block period and was at best a mere procedural irregularity?2. We have heard Dr. A.K. Saraf, learned senior counsel for the appellant, and also Mr. U. Bhuyan, learned Counsel for the Revenue.3. The appellant is an assessee under the Income-tax Act, 1961. He is carrying on business of plying buses and other sundry business in clothes,...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 8
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »