Guwahati Court February 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.
Mosht. Amena Bewa Vs. Assam State Electricity Board and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Feb-13-2007
Amitava Roy, J.1. Heard Mr. Malique, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Das, learned standing council, Assam State Electricity Board (hereinafter referred to as the 'Board').2. The petitioner seeks to invoke the extra-ordinary jurisdiction of this Court for compensating the death of her husband Md. Jalil Sheikh (since deceased) following his electrocution on 17.8.1999.3. Shortly, the background leading to the instant proceeding has to be narrated. According to the petitioner, her husband was an agriculturist and earning his livelihood from his exploits in the fields. On the fateful day, while he was proceeding towards his land, the tip of his umbrella got in touch with the sagging live transmission line leading to his instantaneous death. On receipt of the information, Chapar PS case No. 11.1999 was registered. The postmortem examination of the deceased was conducted at the Civil Hospital, Dhubri. The postmortem report revealed the cause of the death to be high voltage burn.4....
Claudia B. Sangma Vs. State of Meghalaya and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Feb-13-2007
A. Hazarika, J.1. Challenge in this writ petition is to the legality and validity of the Notification dated 28th Feb. 2006, issued by the Commissioner & Secretary to the Government of Meghalaya, Industries Department by which the private respondent No. 5 herein has been promoted temporarily to the post of Joint Director of Industries (Headquarter) under Regulation 4(d) of the Meghalaya Public Service Commission (LOFS) Regulation 1972 (in short MPSC) and allowing him to hold current charge of the post of Director of Industries, Meghalaya, in addition to his own duties with effect from the date of taking over charge of the post until further orders vice Shri S.B. Gurung (Retd.). In fact, the Notification dated 28.2.2006 contains two parts and the later part of the Notification No. IND 148 86/127-A of the same date by which the private respondent No. 5 has been allowed to hold temporarily the current charge of the post of Director of Industries, Meghalaya in addition to his own duties is...
Ramusa Khatoon Mustt. and ors. Vs. Durga Kakati and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Feb-13-2007
I.A. Ansari, J.1. If, in a suit, the defendant takes adjournment for adducing evidence, but on the date to which the hearing of the suit is adjourned, the defendant fails to adduce evidence and, in consequence of such failure of the defendant, the Court decrees the suit, whether an application under Order IX Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure (in short, 'the Code') will lie to set aside such a decree is the moot question, which this revision petition has raised, and, if so, subject to what conditions, such a decree would be amenable to Order IX Rule 13 is yet another important question, which this revision petition has raised.2. The material facts, which have given rise to the present revision, may, in brief, be set out as follows:In Title Suit No. 89/88, the plaintiff adduced evidence and his evidence was closed on 04.05.99. While the suit was pending for recording of the evidence of the defendant side, the defendant filed a petition, on 22.03.2000, seeking time to adduce evidenc...
Ashim Das Vs. State of Assam and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Feb-12-2007
Amitava Roy, J.1. The petitioner, a shareholder of Kampur Co-operative Society (hereafter referred to as the Society) has questioned the validity of the proceedings of the Annual General Meeting and elections to its Managing Committee held on 29.10.2006. By order dated 17.11.2006, this Court while issuing notice on the challenge, restrained the respondent authorities from allowing the newly elected Managing Committee to assume office and function.2. I have heard Mr. A.K. Goswami, Sr. Advocate assisted by Mrs. P. Barman, Advocate for the petitioner, Mrs. V.L. Sinha, learned State Counsel for the official respondents, Mr. G. Baishya, learned Counsel for the respondent No. 6 and Mr. M.K. Boro, learned Counsel for the respondent No. 7.3. The factual foundation of the petitioner's impugnment is available in the writ petition. He has asserted that the Chairman of the Committee by notice dated 14.10.2006 intimated the date of Annual General Meeting and the elections to be fixed on 29.10.2006...
Bani Kanta Sarma and ors. Vs. State of Assam and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Feb-12-2007
Amitava Roy, J.1. This fresh round of litigation pertains to the notice No. KRS.447/2004/51 dated 29/9/2004 issued by the Additional Deputy Commissioner, Kamrup (Metro) seeking eviction of the petitioners from the land involved following the cancellation of the settlement thereof in favour of their predecessor in interest. By order dated 15/10/ 2004, this Court while issuing notice directed maintenance of status quo of the land by the parties. Pending further consideration, by order dated 12/10/2004, this Court while fixing 15/10/2004 for motion hearing suspended the operation of the impugned notice dated 29/9/2004. The petitioners claim that on the basis thereof they continue to occupy the land as on date.2. I have heard Mr. SP Roy, learned Counsel for the petitioners, Mr. S. Ali, Additional Advocate General, Assam, for the official respondents and Mr. CK Sharma Baruah, Sr. Advocate assisted by Mr. D. Das, Advocate for the respondent No. 4 and 5.3. As observed herein above, the parti...
Director General, Border Security Force and ors. Vs. Iboton Singh (Kh)
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Feb-12-2007
I.A. Ansari, J.1. The respondent herein, namely, Kh. Iboton Singh, while working as a constable in 95 Bn. of the Border Security Force (in short, 'the BSF'), was arrested, on 15-12-84, by police in connection with Moreh Police Station Case No. 65 (12/1984) under Section 302 IPC on the allegation that he had stabbed to death constable Gharbaran Ram of 95 Bn. of BSF, the FIR against the accused having been lodged by the Coy. Commander, Moreh Coy. The BSF authorities exercised their discretion, under Section 80 of the Border Security Force Act, 1968 (in short, 'BSF Act'), to institute a General Security Force Court (in short, 'GSFC'). A GSFC was accordingly convened and the respondent herein faced the trial on the charge of having intentionally caused death of constable Gharbaran Ram, on 14-12-94, by stabbing him with a knife, and committing thereby the civil offence of murder punishable under Section 302 IPC, the case of the prosecution being, in brief, thus: On 14-12-84, while Barbar K...
Khaizallan (Dr.) and anr. Vs. Thockchom Jitenkumar Singh and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Feb-09-2007
B.K. Sharma, J.1. Being aggrieved by the direction of the learned Single Judge to provide salary to the respondent/writ petitioner in the particular scale of pay stated to be the revised scale of pay and imposition of cost in respect of the writ proceeding, the respondent has preferred this appeal.2. The respondent/writ petitioner is the law officer in the Manipur Pollution Control Board (Board). The controversy relating to admissible pay scale (revised) in respect of the post of law officer in the Board led to filing of the writ petition. The writ petitioner was appointed as the Law Officer in the time scale of pay of Rs. 2200-4000/- (pre-revised). He was so appointed by order dated 9.3.1998 issued under the signature of the Member Secretary of the Board. It will be pertinent to mention here that the post of Law Officer in the Board in the time scale of pay of Rs. 2200-4000 was created by Annex-ure-W/2 order dated 27.12.1997 issued in the name of the Governor of Manipur and under the...
Associate Enterprise Vs. Coal India Limited and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Feb-09-2007
Amitava Roy, J.1. In challenge is the decision of the Coal India Limited (hereinafter for short as 'CIL') to award the work of transferring coal in the railway wagons from its stock at Tirap and Tikak railway siding to the respondent No. 6, as contained in the letters dated 16.01.2007 to the said effect.2. I have heard Mr. A.B. Choudhury, Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. H. Hoque Advocate for the petitioner, Mr. M.Z. Ahmed, Senior Advocate for CIL and Mr. P.K. Goswami, Senior Advocate assisted by Mr.S. Sharma, Advocate for respondent No. 6.3. As the edificial facts and the legal issues, are common, both these petitions were heard analogously and are being disposed of by this common order.A brief outline of the facts leading to the instant proceedings needs to be sketched for better comprehension of the rival contentions. The petitioner, a registered partnership firm, claims to be engaged in transfer of coal into railway wagons under the CIL for 18 years and had been settled with the sa...
Bijay Rajkhowa Vs. State Bank of India and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Feb-09-2007
T.N.K. Singh, J.1. By this writ petition, petitioner is assailing the enquiry report cum findings dated 10th September, 1999, submitted by the Enquiry Officer after full length enquiry in which the petitioner had participated and also he was available with all the opportunities for defending his case, Order dated 30.11.99 passed by the Asstt. General Manager, Region-I (Disciplinary Authority), Order dated 28.1.2000 passed by the Assistant General Manager (Appointing Authority) for imposing the penalty of dismissal from service to the petitioner, Order dated 18.7.2000 passed by the Deputy General Manager (Appellate Authority) for dismissing the appeal preferred by the petitioner against the order dated 28.1.2000 for dismissing the petitioner from service and also for a direction to the respondents to re-instate the petitioner in his service along with all the consequential benefits from 30.11.99.2. Heard Mr. M.K. Choudhury, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. A. Borkotoki, learned C...
Subrata Paul Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Feb-08-2007
P.G. Agarwal, J.1. By filing this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner is challenging his detention under the National Security Act, 1980 (briefly 'NSA') by virtue of order dated 29.08.2006 issued by the District Magistrate, Kamrup (Metropolitan), Guwahati under Memo No. X/2006/NSA/48/CA (A) and also order dated 11.10.2006 issued by the Commissioner & Secretary to the Government of Assam, Home and Political Department under Memo. No. PLA. 459/06/279, confirming the detention for a period of 12 months (Annexures-A and E respectively).2. We have heard Mr. P.C. Dey, learned Counsel for the petitioner, Mr. D.C. Chakraborty, learned Central Govt. Standing Counsel representing respondent No. 1 and Ms. B. Goyal, learned state counsel representing respondents 2 to 6.3. The detention order has been basically challenged on the ground of long delay in considering and rejecting the representation. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that delay ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »