Guwahati Court October 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.
Paonam Achou Singh Vs. Laishram Nandakumar Singh and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Oct-31-2007
B.D. Agarwal, J.1. This miscellaneous application has Stemmed out of Election Petition No. l of 2007. The election petitioner, namely, Shri Paonam Achou is challenging the election of the respondent No. 1, namely, Shri Laishram Nandakumar Singh, who has been elected to the 9th, Manipur Legislative Assembly from 10-Uripok Assembly Constituency. The election result was declared on 27.02.2007. In the said election the petitioner has been defeated by the respondent No. l by 971 votes. Being unsatisfied with the election process and election of the respondent No. 1 for the aforesaid Assembly Constituency, the above named defeated candidate has filed the connected election petition under Sections 80-A read with Section 81 of the Representation of Peoples Act, 1951 (briefly 'ROP Act'). In the election petition, apart from seeking declaration that the election of the respondent No. 1 is null and void, the petitioner has also made an alternative prayer to declare him as lawfully and democrati...
Karam Thamarjit Singh Vs. AllauddIn Khan
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Oct-31-2007
B.D. Agarwal, J.1. The respondent herein has been declared elected to the 9th Manipur Legislative Assembly from 6 Keirao Assembly Constituency. The election petitioner was also a candidate for the aforesaid Assembly Constituency. However, the petitioner was defeated by 2 (two) votes. The election result was declared on 27.02.2007. Feeling aggrieved by the said defeat, allegedly due to improper/illegal reception of few votes, the aforesaid election petition has been filed under Sections 100 (1) (d) (iii) (iv) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 (hereinafter 'ROP Act' in short), so as to declare the election of the sole respondent as void.2. Having duly notified, the respondent has appeared to contest the election petition. However, before filing his formal written statement, the respondent has filed the present miscellaneous application raising a preliminary objection about the maintainability of the election petition basically on the ground that the petitioner has failed to ...
Jay Govind Yadav (Goala) Vs. Ahmed Tea Company (P) Ltd.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Oct-16-2007
B.P. Katakey, J.1. The defendant in Title Suit No. 78/2007, pending in the Court of the learned Munsiff, No. 2 at Dibrugarh, on the date fixed for cross-examination of PW-1 filed petition No. 2757/2005 on 16.11.2005 under Order 6, Rule 17 read with Section 151 of the Civil Procedure Code praying for amendment of the written statement by way of addition, by contending that after the engagement of a new Counsel by the defendant he could find that the said paragraphs were missing from his draft written statement and consequently from the written statement filed.2. The plaintiff/opposite party filed their objection to the said application seeking amendment in the pleadings in the written statement contending that such amendments have been sought for just to nullify their admission made in the written statement and if such amendments are allowed, it will amount to wiping out the admission already made by the defendant in the written statement and further contending that the amendment sough...
Deba Kumar Das Vs. Gauhati High Court and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Oct-16-2007
Amitava Roy, J.1. The petitioner, an officer in the Assam Judicial Service in the instant proceeding under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has questioned the legality and validity of the decision of this Court on the administrative side, to terminate his probation and pending issuance of the consequential Government notification to that effect to restrain him from discharging judicial works, as contained in the letters dated 22/12/2006 and 11/1/2007 (Annexures 9,8 and 7 to the writ petition). It has been submitted by the learned State Counsel that the related issues being sub-judice before this Court further follow up steps have been deferred. The termination of the petitioner's probation, therefore, has not yet been given effect to though he stands relieved of the judicial duties as on date.2. We have heard Mr. PK Goswami, Sr. Advocate assisted by Mr. BM Choudhury and Mr. S. Bharali, Advocates for the petitioner, Mr. PK Mushary, Sr. Government Advocate for the State responde...
Sheri Sarif Mullah Vs. State of Assam and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Oct-15-2007
Ranjan Gogoi, J.1. The petitioner, who is a Home Guard, was injured in a bomb explosion that took place on 13.12.2004 in front of the Hatigaon Police Patro Post under Dispur Police Station. The petitioner received splinter injuries as a result of the bomb blast and remained as an indoor patient in the Gauhati Medical College Hospital from 13.12.2004 to 27.12.2004. He was again admitted in the Gauhati Medical College Hospital on 7.3.2005 for a surgical operation to remove the splinters, which had remained embedded in different parts of his body. Though the said operation was carried out it was not fully successful as the injuries caused to the liver of the petitioner by the splinters could not be effectively handled in the Gauhati Medical College Hospital. The said Hospital by a Reference Certificate dated 9.3.2005 advised the petitioner to attend the All India Institute of Medical Science, New Delhi for successful management of the liver injuries suffered by the petitioner.According t...
Pradip Kr. Pathak Vs. State of Assam and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Oct-15-2007
Amitava Roy, J.1. Aggrieved by the resolution dated 28.6.2007 of the Governing Body of the Bilasipara College, Dhubri (hereafter referred to as the College) deciding to handover the charge of the Office of the Principal thereof to the respondent No. 4, the petitioner has projected this challenge thereto seeking redress. This Court while issuing notice on 20.7.2007 in the interim restrained the Director of Higher Education, Assam, from according approval to the said resolution.2. I have heard Mr. T.C. Chutia, learned Counsel for the petitioner, Ms. Mary Gogoi, learned Standing Counsel, Education Department, Mr. A.K. Goswami, Sr. Advocate, assisted by Mr. S. Banik, Advocate for the respondent No. 3 and Mr. A.K. Sharma, learned Counsel for the respondent No. 4.3. The pleaded facts forming the factual background are essential. The petitioner's version is that he is a Lecturer in the Department of Mathematics in the College since 2.3.1976 and in recognition of his seniority in service, com...
Boren Sarma Vs. State of Assam and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Oct-12-2007
B.K. Sharma, J.1. Strange are the ways, the Education Department, Govt., of Assam acts through its officers. The present proceeding is in respect of the claim of the petitioner for regularization of his service with retrospective effect which has arisen out of purported appointment of the petitioner as Music Teacher as per the endorsement of the Inspector of Schools, Kamrup District Circle, (KDC) Guwahati on the body of the representation made by the petitioner for his appointment as such. There is no separate order of appointment of the petitioner, but it is the endorsement on the body of the representation which is stated to be The appointment order of the petitioner.2. The petitioner by his representation dated 22.04.92 addressed to the Inspector of Schools, KDC, made a prayer for his appointment as Music Teacher in the particular school called Phaguna Rabha High School, Jatia, Guwahati. His representation was forwarded by the Headmaster of the School with the endorsement 'Recommen...
Makkadas Ali Mazumdar and anr. Vs. Aftab UddIn Barbhuiya and anr.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Oct-12-2007
I.A. Ansari, J.1. The moot question, raised in the present revision, is this : Whether the bar in taking cognizance created by Section 195(1)(b)(ii) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short, 'the Code') applies only when the offence has been committed with respect to a document after the document was already produced or given in evidence in a proceeding in any Court, i.e., during the time, when the document was in custodia legis, or the bar, so created by law, applies even to a document, which was forged or alleged to be forged before the document was introduced as evidence in any proceeding in a Court.2. Before coming to the merit of the revision, it is appropriate that the material facts giving rise to this revision are taken note of. The material facts are as under:(i) The present petitioners, as plaintiffs, instituted Title Suit No. 28/2002, in the Court of the Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Hailakandi, seeking declaration of their rights, title, interest, confirmation of possessi...
State of Tripura Vs. Bikash Sinha and anr.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Oct-12-2007
R.B. Misra, J.1. Heard Mr. A. Ghosh, learned Addl. PP for the State. None appears for the opposite parties.2. The present revision petition preferred under Section 397 read with Section 401 of CrPC is directed against the order dated 8.6.05 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, West Tripura, Agartala rejecting the application of learned Public Prosecutor (in short called PP) to withdraw from the prosecution in respect of two accused persons out of 27 accused persons chargesheeted in connection with ST 48 (WT/A)/2001.3. It appears that a memorandum of tripartite settlement amongst the Government of India, Government of Tripura and one section of National Liberation Front of Tripura (in short 'NLFT') (Kamini-Montu Koloi group) was signed on 15.4.04 according to which the Government of India and Government of Tripura have been making concerted efforts to bring about an effective settlement of the problems of the tribals and attempts have been made on a continuing basis to usher in peace ...
Jakir HossaIn Vs. State of Tripura
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Oct-12-2007
U.B. Saha, J.1. This appeal is preferred under Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure against the conviction for offence under Section 376(1) read with Section 511 of the I.P.C. and sentence to R.I. for a period of three years and a further fine of Rs. 3,000/- and i/d. R. I. for another period of one year by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sonamura, West Tripura vide his judgment and order dated 2.12.2006 in Sessions Trial No. 06 (WT/S) of2006.2. Heard Mr. A.K. Bhowmik, learned senior counsel, assisted by Mr. M. Laskar, learned Counsel for the convict-appellant and Mr. A. Ghosh, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor for the State respondent.3. The accusations which led to try the accused-appellant and award conviction are narrated as follows:On 21.5.2002 at about 5 O'clock in the morning while the victim (P.W. 5) was going to work in the house of one Abani Sarkar of Ratan Doula under Kalamchoura Police Station, on the way the accused-appellant Jakir Hossain came and called her...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »