Guwahati Court June 2007 Judgments

Gargi and Associates Private Ltd. Vs. Gauhati Municipal Corporation an ...

Court: Guwahati

A. Hazarika, J.1. Heard Mr. N. Dutta, learned Sr. Counsel assisted by Mr. S.S. Dey, advocate appearing for the petitioner, Also heard Mr. S. Chamaria, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents Guwahati Municipal Corporation.2. The writ petitioner in the instant petition is a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956. By this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the legality and validity of the order/decision dated 19.9.06 passed by the Commissioner, Guwahati Municipal Corporation, Respondent No. 2, disposing of the representations dated 19.6.06 and 17.8.06 submitted by the writ petitioner for granting No Objection Certificate (NOC for short) for 5th floor constructed by it.3. The petitioner company with the intention of starting a project to construct a multistoried building in a plot of and measuring 8.03 are covered by Dag No. 2814 (new), 170 (old) of K.P. Patta No. 42 (old), 1218 (new) in village Jatia of Guwahati town, submitted the building's structu...

Cit Vs. Arman Sheikh

Court: Guwahati

1. This appeal by the revenue preferred against the judgment and order dated 7-9-2005, passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Guwahati Bench, in I. T. A. No. 119 (Gauhati) of 2003 has been admitted for hearing on the following question of law:Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified and correct in law in confirming the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) in the interpretation of the meaning, scope and ambit of 'undisclosed income' defined in Section 158B(b) of the Act, 1961, to hold that the deposits of Rs. 65.28 lakhs and 39.70 lakhs cannot be subjected to assessment under Section 158BC of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ?2. We have heard Mr. U. Bhuyan, learned standing counsel for the revenue, and also Dr. A. K. Saraf, learned senior counsel for the respondent.3. There was search and seizure in the business as well as residential premises of the assessee on 20-7-2000. Proceedings under Section 158BC of the Act were initiated. The assessee...

United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner for Workmen's Compens ...

Court: Guwahati

I.A. Ansari, J.1. This is an appeal under Section 30 of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 ('the W.C. Act'), against the order dated 22.1.2003, passed in W.C. No. 40 of 2001, by the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Zone III, Tezpur, whereby the learned Commissioner refused to register an agreement of compromise made under Section 28 of the W.C. Act, whereby the parties to the claim proceeding had agreed that the workman shall receive a sum of Rs. 90,000, as compensation, for the disablement, which the workman had suffered. While refusing to register the agreement aforementioned, the learned Commissioner directed the insurer to enhance the compensation amount from Rs. 90,000 to Rs. 1,50,000 and submit a fresh petition for registration of the agreement in terms of the provisions of Section 28 of the W.C. Act. Aggrieved by the refusal to register the agreement, as had been sought for by the parties and the direction given to the insurer to enhance the compensation amount, as me...

Assam Syntex Ltd. and anr. Vs. Registrar of Companies and anr.

Court: Guwahati

T. Vaiphei, J.1. The validity of the second part of the order dated 24.1.2006 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Shillong in Criminal Case No. 580-587 (S) of 2005 requiring the petitioners under Section 614A of the Companies Act, 1956 to file three copies of the balance sheets and profit and loss accounts for financial years commencing from 31.3.1997 to 31.3.2004 with the Registrar of Companies, Assam, Meghalaya, Tripura, Manipur, Nagaland, Arunachal Pradesh and Mizoram within one month from the date of order, failing which the provision of Section 614A (2) of the Companies Act, 1956 would be attracted, is called into question this criminal petition.2. Both Mr. B.D. Das, the learned Counsel for the petitioners and Mr. R. Deb Nath, the learned Central Government Counsel, were heard at length.3. The facts, shorn of necessary details but are relevant for this case, are that the petitioner No. 1 is a subsidiary of the Assam Industrial Development Corporation Ltd., a Government of ...

Shri Dino Dg Dympep and anr. Vs. State of Meghalaya and ors.

Court: Guwahati

T. Vaiphei, J.1. This is an application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India filed by the petitioners claiming the following reliefs:1. To pay adequate compensation to the petitioner No. 2, wife of the under trial prisoner, namely, Late Phomlin Mawlieh, who died on 11-9-1998 at Civil Hospital, Shillong while injudicial custody.2. To cause an enquiry by an independent and impartial agency as to the cause of death of the said under trial prisoner.3. To appoint highly qualified Forensic Science Medical Specialist for conducting Post-Mortem Examination on the dead body of the undertrial prisoner and;4. To constitute State Human Rights Commission and Human Rights Court as required under Sections 21 arrd 30 of the protection of Human Rights Act, 1993.2. Mr. S.P. Mahanta, the learned Counsel for the petitioner and Mr. A. Sharma, the learned Advocate General of Meghalaya have been heard at length.3. Though the case was initially registered as Public Interest Litigation, on the petit...

Smt. Avijeeta Mohanty Casshyap Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax and ors.

Court: Guwahati

Ranjan Gogoi, J.1. The challenge in the present writ petition is against an order dt. 28th Sept., 2001, passed by the CIT, Guwahati, transferring the file of the petitioner to the Dy. CIT, Circle-3(1), Cuttack (Orissa), i.e., respondent No. 3.2. The relevant facts may be briefly noticed at the outset.The petitioner is an income-tax assessee under the jurisdiction of the ITO, Ward-1, Nagaon. The petitioner claims to have submitted her up-to-date returns. According to the petitioner, on 28th Oct., 1998, a search and seizure operation was carried out in the house and premises of one Dr. Radha Charan Mohanty and Dr. Sujta Mohanty, who are the parents of the petitioner. The said operation was also carried out in respect of one Dr. Madhumita Mohanty, Dr. Jagat Ballav Jagdev, who is the sister and brother-in-law, respectively, of the petitioner as well as one M/s Women's Clinic and Nursing Home at Cuttack, a partnership firm of the aforesaid relatives of the petitioner. According to the peti...

Chalthiangi Vs. State of Mizoram and ors.

Court: Guwahati

Mutum B.K. Singh, J.1. On setting aside the Judgment and order dated 23rd February, 2005 passed by this Court in RSA No. 4/2004 by the Hon'ble Apex Court vide order dated 27th February, 2006 passed in Civil Appeal No. 1319/2006 (arising out of SLP. (Civil) Nos. 18543-18544 of 2005), this case has been remitted with directions for treating the same as a First Appeal from the decision of the Title Suit No. 2/1990 of the Court of Addl. Deputy Commissioner(J), Lunglei, Mizoram and deciding it with regard to questions of fact and law. Accordingly, this case has been re-registered as RFA No. 02/2006.2. That, this case is now being taken up for the third round by this Court. The Judgment and decree dated 27.07.2004 passed in Title Suit No. 2/1990 by the learned Addl. Deputy Commissioner(J), Lung lei, Mizoram, dismissing the suit filed by the plaintiff-appellant but decreeing/declaring the Secretary, Home Department, Govt. of Mizoram as the rightful and legal owner of the land in dispute and ...

Nirhandra Thaosen Vs. State of Assam and anr.

Court: Guwahati

B.P. Katakey, J.1. The appellant, a Sub Registrar in the Department of Revenue (Registration), Govt. of Assam, who was posted at Hojai on being transferred vide order dated 10.11.2004, has challenged the order of transfer dated 26.3.2007, transferring him from Hojai to Udalguri in the interest of public service, issued by the Deputy Secretary, Govt. of Assam, Revenue (Registration) Department and also the order dated 14.5.2007 passed by the same authority rejecting the representation dated 27.3.2007 filed by the appellant against the said order of transfer, in WP (C) No. 2366/2007, mainly on two count, i.e., the order of transfer is violative of the Office Memorandums dated 19.9.1992 and 4.2.2002 issued by the Chief Secretary to the Govt. of Assam and the Commissioner and Secretary, Govt. of Assam Personal Department, respectively, insofar as it relates to the requirement of obtaining prior approval of the Chief Minister before passing an order of transfer prior to the completion of n...

New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Bhupen Saikia and anr.

Court: Guwahati

Reported in: 2009ACJ1416

I.A. Ansari, J. 1. This is an appeal preferred by the insurer against the award dated 20.6.2003, passed in M.A.C. Appeal No. 202 of 2002, by the learned Member, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Sonitpur, Tezpur, whereby the learned Tribunal has directed the insurer appellant to pay Rs. 1,50,000 as compensation with interest at the rate of 9 per cent per annum from the date of making of the claim application until the realization of the entire awarded amount.2. Heard Mr. A.K. Goswami, learned senior counsel, assisted by Mr. A. Ahmed, learned Counsel for the appellant. None has appeared on behalf of the respondents.3. The material facts giving rise to the present appeal may, in brief, be set out as under:(i) The claimant instituted a proceeding under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 ('the M.V. Act'), seeking a sum of Rs. 2,50,000 as compensation for the injuries sustained by him in a motor vehicle accident, the claimant's case being, in brief, thus: On 23.11.2001 at about 5 p....

Sadhan Datta Vs. State of Tripura and ors.

Court: Guwahati

R.B. Misra, J.1. Heard Mr. K.N. Bhattacharjee, learned Senior Counsel along with Mr. S. Acherjee, learned Advocate. Heard Mr. A. Ghosh, learned Counsel for the Respondents.2. The present Writ Appeal have been preferred against the Order dated 01.07.2005 passed in Writ petition 115 of 2001 (Dr. Sadhan Datta, Appellants v. The State of Tripura, Respondents) where by the letter of resignation of appellant writ petitioner dated 31.05.1991 addressed to the Secretary to the Government of Tripura, Department of Health & Family Welfare was treated as resignation and not the conditional resignation as the same was accepted by the Governor by an order dated 13.09.1991 w.e.f. 1.09.1991, and after having been notified in the official Gazette, it was found to have been brought to the notice of all concerned including the writ petitioner and, therefore, no prejudice was said to have been caused to the writ petitioner and all his subsequent correspondences for leave and for acceptance of his volunta...