Guwahati Court May 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.
K. Lalzidingliana Vs. State of Mizoram and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: May-30-2007
Hrishikesh Roy, J.1. Heard Mr. M. Guite learned Counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. Helen Dawngliani learned Assistant Government Advocate for the State respondents. Although notice was issued to private respondent No. 7, none appears to represent her in the present case.2. The present dispute is over a plot of land measuring 11.66 Bighas located near Air Field, Pengthlang, Zemabawk of Mizoram State.3. The claim of the petitioner is that on an application made by him, the Asstt. Settlement Officer-II had issued a Periodic Patta on 27.04.05(Annexure-I) in respect of the land in question, in favour of the writ petitioner for a period of 5 years beginning from 2005 to 2009. Following the allotment, the petitioner paid the requisite Periodic Patta fee to the Revenue Department on 27.4.05 itself for which a receipt was issued which is marked as Annexure-II to the writ petition.However, the respondent No. 7 had made an application for allotment for the very same land and it appears t...
Joydeb Laha Vs. Joy Singh
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: May-30-2007
Aftab H. Saikia, J.1. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties.2. Having considered the pleaded case of the petitioner and upon hearing the learned Counsel for the parties, it is felt that since the matter relates to rejection of the prayer for amendment of the plaint made by the plaintiff/ petitioner, it would be unnecessary to keep the matter pending and accordingly, the court proposes to dispose of the matter today itself.3. On meticulous perusal of the materials available on record in this writ petition, it appears that this application has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus/ Certiorari or an appropriate Writ/Order of direction in a challenge to the order dated 15.12.2005 rendered by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Bongaigaon in T.S. No. 26/2002 whereby the prayer made by the petitioner/plaintiff for amendment of the plaint including the impleadment of the concerned party was rejected with the following prayer:U...
State of Manipur and ors. Vs. Hurilung Kamei
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: May-30-2007
M.B.K. Singh, J.1. This writ appeal arises out of the judgment and order dated 7.6.2005 passed by a learned Single Judge of this court in Writ Petition (C) No. 1636 of 2003 thereby directing the present appellants, who are the respondents in the writ petition, to pay a sum of Rs. 1,20,000/- with interest @ 12% per annum from the date of presentation of the writ petition till the realization to the present respondent, who is the writ petitioner, in connection with the death of his wife due to electrocution.2. We have heard Mr. A. Jagat, learned Govt. Advocate appearing on behalf of the appellants and Mr. S. Rupachandra, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent, at length.3. The following are the main grounds of objections submitted on behalf of the appellants challenging the impugned judgment and order:(i) There are disputed questions of facts in the case and as such, the learned Single Judge should not have entertained the writ petition;(ii) In the absence of clear neglig...
Purna Chandra Mahanta and anr. Vs. Deb Kanta Mahanta and ors. Legal He ...
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: May-30-2007
Amitava Roy, J.1. This appeal projects a challenge to the judgment and order dated 11.8.1994 and the decree dated 18.8.1994 passed by the learned District Judge, Morigaon in Title Suit No. 45(M)/1992 decreeing the suit of the original respondent-plaintiff, Dharmeswar Mahanta(since deceased) presently substituted by his heirs and legal representatives.2. I have heard Mr. D.C. Mahanta, Senior Advocate assisted by Ms. R. Bhattacharjee, Advocate for the appellants and Mr. A.C. Sarma, Advocate for the respondents-plaintiffs.3. The predecessor in interest of the present respondents plaintiffs named hereinabove instituted Title Suit No. 58(N)/1990 in the Court of the learned Assistant District Judge, Nagaon, against the appellants and others praying for a decree inter alia for declaration of his right, title and interest over the suit land described in schedule 'KA' to the plaint, confirmation of his possession thereof and permanent injunction. He also prayed for a decree for khas possessio...
Dharamraj Kumar Singh Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: May-29-2007
U.B. Saha, J.1. This appeal arises from the judgment and order dated 03.06.05 passed by the learned single Judge of this Court in W.P. (C) No. 3533 of 2002 whereby and whereunder the learned single Judge dismissed the writ petition upholding the order dated 20.9.01 issued by the Commandant, 27th Bn. CRPF, Joynagar (Sibsagar), imposing penalty of dismissal from service w.e.f. the date the writ petitioner was convicted and sentenced by the C.J.M. cum-Commandant, 27th Bn. CRPF Under Section 16(2) of the C.R.P.F. Act, 1949 (hereinafter refers to as the Act).2. We have heard Mr. M.U. Mahmud, learned Counsel for the appellant and Mrs. G Singh, learned C.G.S.C. on behalf of the respondents.3. The factual background necessary for the purpose of understanding the legal issues involved in this appeal are as under:The writ petitioner/appellant was a constable (General duty) of the 27th Bn. CRPF. On 5.9.01 a complaint was lodged by the Officer Commanding of the said Battalion, R.J. Parpatti, alle...
Shankar Prasad Nandi and ors. Vs. State of Assam and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: May-25-2007
B.P. Katakey, J.1. The petitioners, who belong to general category, by the present writ petitions have challenged the legality and validity of the gradation list dated 02.07.2002 issued by the Commissioner and Secretary to the Govt. of Assam wherein the names of the petitioners are placed below the Respondent Nos. 4 to 12 in Writ Petition (C) No. 4739/02 and Respondent Nos. 3 to 11 in W.P.(C) No. 4740/02 (hereinafter referred to as private Respondents), who belong to the reserved category. The other respondents i.e., Respondent Nos. 13 to 54 in W.P.(C) No. 4739/02 and Respondent Nos. 12 to 45 in W.P.(C) No. 4740/02, who have been impleaded on the basis of the applications filed by them, are not concerned in the mater of fixation of inter se seniority of the petitioners and the aforesaid respondents, as they were recruited in the batch earlier to the petitioners and the petitioners do not claim any relief against them.2. Both the writ petitioners and the private respondents were direct...
Brahmaputra Consortium Ltd. and anr. Vs. State of Assam and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: May-25-2007
Hrishikesh Roy, J.1. Heard Mr. P.K. Goswami, learned senior Counsel for the writ petitioner and also Mr. K.N. Choudhury, learned Addl. Advocate General, Assam appearing for respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3.2. The present matter pertains to invitation of bids dated 22.12.2006 issued by the Chief Engineer, PWD (Roads) for construction/improvement of Pandit Hemchandra Goswami Path under North-Eastern Council (NEC)'s 10th five year plan programme. The works involved in the tender process have been divided into three separate packages namely J-3, J-4 and J-5.3. The petitioner No. 1 claiming to be an experienced Company relating to contract works, responded to the invitation for bids by filing their tender documents within the prescribed period. The tender process was a two-bid-system, where the price bids were to be opened and considered only after deciding on the eligibility and responsiveness of the technical bids submitted by different tenderers.4. The challenge in the instant writ petition i...
Uttar Dhemaji Gaon Panchayat and ors. Vs. State of Assam and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: May-25-2007
T. Nanda Kumar Singh, J.1. By these writ petitions, the petitioners are challenging the impugned order No. PDA 95/2007/2 dated 29.3.2007 issued by the Joint Secretary to the Government of Assam, Panchayat & Rural Development Department and such being the situation, these writ petitions are being disposed of by this common judgment and order.2. Heard Mr. A.M. Mazumdar, Mr. A.K. Goswami, Mr. N. Dutta, Mr. A.S. Choudhury learned senior counsels appearing for the petitioners as well as Mr. A. K. Phukan, learned Advocate General appearing for the State of Assam. Also heard Mr. M.U. Mahmud, learned Standing Counsel, Assam State Election Commission.It would be apt to reproduce the impugned order dated 29.3.2007.Government of Assam Panchayat & Rural Development Department Dispur: GuwahatiNo.PDA.95/2007/2 dated Dispur, the 29th March, 2007 This is for information of all concerned that on completion of tenure of 5 (five) years with effect from the date of its first meeting, all Gaon Panchayats,...
India Carbon Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax and anr.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: May-25-2007
Ranjan Gogoi, J.1. The Petitioner, who was the Appellant in Income Tax Appeal No. 13/2000, seeks a review of the order dated 1.4.2004 passed in the said Appeal by which order this Court had refused to go into the questions framed by holding the same to be not necessary and accordingly disposed of the Appeal.2. The facts, which will be necessary to be noticed for an effective adjudication of the questions arising in the Review Petition, may be stated at the outset:The assessment of the petitioner to income tax for the assessment year 1993-94 was finalized on 10.1.1996. For the previous year ending on 31.3.1993, the petitioner had collected Central Sales Tax amounting to Rs. 53,82,059. Though collected, the said amount was not paid into the State Exchequer. The petitioner did not include the amount in its trading as well as in the profit and loss account. The Assessing Officer, in the said facts, treated the amount in question as a part of the trading receipt of the petitioner during th...
Maibam Rasbihari Singh Vs. State of Manipur and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: May-25-2007
B.D. Agarwal, J.1. Drafting of legislation is not only an art but it is also a science. A perfect and a well crafted legislation is likely to achieve the objectives for which it is enacted, whereas a defective legislation not only defeats the intention and purpose for which it is legislated but defective rules and laws may also create confusion in the same field as well as injustice to the prospective beneficiaries of such law.2. The case in hand is an instance of causing artificial discrimination due to defective amendment of Service Rules, thereby depriving the writ petitioner from service benefits, more particularly, in the field of promotion.3. The writ petitioner is a well-qualified and talented police officer. The petitioner is possessing degrees in Mechanical Engineering and also in Master of Technology. In the year 1979, the Government of Manipur created a post of Deputy Superintendent of Police (Motor Transport), ostensibly due to increase in the fleet of vehicles of Police ...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »