Guwahati Court June 2007 Judgments

Lakhinath Chutia Alias Lakhinandan Vs. State of Assam

Court: Guwahati

B.P. Katakey, J.1. The criminal proceeding was set in motion on lodging the First Information Report No. 202/99 (Ext. 2) by Rajen Gowala (who has not been examined by the prosecution) in Rajgarh Police Out Post in the district of Dibrugarh under Tingkhong Police Station wherein it has been alleged that on 19-2-1999 the accused appellant Lakhinath Chutia killed the complainant's sister Reena Goala and kept her dead body concealed somewhere. On the basis of the said FIR, Tingkhong Police Station case No. 12 /99 under Section 302 /201, IPC was registered. The investigating agency consequently conducted the investigation and having found materials against the present appellant submitted the charge-sheet under Section 302/201, IPC. The case being exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions, it was committed to the Court of Sessions which framed the charge against the accused appellant on 1-10-1999. The charge being read over and explained to the accused appellant, he denied the same and p...

Md. Sadar Ali Vs. RiajuddIn Akanda and ors.

Court: Guwahati

Aftab H. Saikia, J.1. Heard Mr. P. Sharma. learned Counsel appearing for the applicant as well as Mr. U. Bhuyan, learned Counsel for the respondents.2. This is an application filed under Section 378(4), Cr. P.C. seeking grant of special leave to appeal from the Judgment and order dated 24-8-2006 passed by the learned Additional Session Judge. Fast Track Court, Sonitpur, Tezpur in Sessions Case No. 164/ 04 acquitting all the 10 respondents from the charges levelled under Sections 147/ 148/149/302, IPC.3. On close perusal of the impugned judgment as well as the materials made available in this application, it appears that the Sessions case arose out of filing of an FIR with the Officer-in-Charge of Borghat outpost on 18-4-2003. On the basis of the said FIR, the police registered a case being Tezpur P.S. Case No. 658/2003 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 1323/2003 and accordingly the investigation ensued.4. That being the position, it does indicate that prima facie on the face of the recor...

National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Anindita Debnath (Roy) and ors.

Court: Guwahati

R.B. Misra, J.1. Heard Mr. A. Lodh, learned Counsel for the petitioner, Also heard Mr. B. Banerjee, learned Counsel for the respondents.2. The present petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been preferred by the National Insurance Company, the petitioner herein, for exercising power of superintendence to set side the order dated 14.8.06 passed by the learned Member, Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, West Tripura, Agartala (for short, learned Tribunal) in TS (MAC) No. 591 of 2004 where by awarding compensation in reference to the application preferred by the claimant-opposite parties under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act in context of the death of Debi Prasad Roy which took place in a road traffic accident occurred on 7.3.04 at about 0600 hours near Tanti Para on Agartala-Airport road by the Commander Jeep hearing No. TR-01-3120.3. It appears that on the fateful day on 7.3.2004 in the morning deceased Debi Prasad Roy was going towards Agartala from Usha Bazar b...

Srinjay Kumar Singh Vs. State of Nagaland

Court: Guwahati

K. Meruno, J.1. I have heard Mr. B.K. Mahajan, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as Mr. N.M. Jamir, learned Public Prosecutor for the State.2. This revision application has been filed against the order dated 28.2.07, passed in GR. No. 404/06, corresponding to Dimapur (E) PS Case No. 136/06, under Section 471/120B IPC. The grievance of the petitioner in this revision application is the rider that was put as a condition while granting bail to the accused on 28.2.07. The relevant portion reads as follows: 'furnish a surety from a permanent resident of Dimapur having immovable properties.' The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the accused was arrested on 6.11.06 from Chittaranjan in the District of Burdwan, West Bengal and brought to Dimapur. The accused being a resident in the State of West Bengal, he is not in a position to furnish surety from a permanent dent of Dimapur having immovable properties and as such, this condition imposed amounts to denial of...

Laba Baruah and anr. Vs. State of Assam and ors.

Court: Guwahati

Aftab H. Saikia, J.1. Whether 'The Call Deposits' from Guwahati Co-operative Urban Bank (for short, 'the Bank') in respect of submission of tender despite the specific condition for submitting the earnest money by way of NSC/KVP or by Fixed Deposit Receipt (FDR), Term Deposit Receipt (T.D.R.J/Guarantee Bond of a Nationalized Bank can be accepted by the State Authority as an earnest money, is the limited and short question to be answered in this writ petition.2. In the instant case 'Call Deposits' from the Bank were submitted by the petitioners as earnest money along with their respective/separate tenders for settlement of a contract as regards the supply of dietary and other articles under different groups to various jails particularly, to the Superintendent District Jail, Mongaldoi and to the Superintendent Central Jail, Guwahatl. However, the State Authority rejected all such 'call deposits' as earnest money being violative of the specific terms and conditions of the Notice Inviting...

S.N. Rai (Dr.) Vs. North Eastern Hill University and ors.

Court: Guwahati

T. Vaiphei, J.1. This writ petition filed by the petitioner is directed against the refusal of the respondent-University to allow him to attend and participate in the meetings of the Academic Council of the University or to issue him the notices, agenda papers, etc. of the said meetings held from time to time, even though he is a member of the Council.2. Heard Mr. V.K. Jindal, the learned senior Counsel assisted by Mr. S. Jindal, the learned Counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Sen, the learned Counsel for the respondent University.3. The material facts of the case as pleaded by the petitioner are that, he is M.Sc., PhD in Physics from Banaras Hindu University and that he used to work as a temporary lecturer in the Banaras Hindu University and did his Post Doctoral in Germany, USA and UK. He joined the services of the University in the Department of Chemistry and on 18.8.1993, he was appointed as Director, Computer Centre of NEHU, Shillong and since then, he has been leading the aforesa...

S.N. Rai (Dr.) Vs. North Eastern Hill University and ors.

Court: Guwahati

Reported in: 2007(4)GLT229

T. Vaiphei, J.1. This writ petition filed by the petitioner is directed against the refusal of the respondent-University to allow him to attend and participate in the meetings of the Academic Council of the University or to issue him the notices, agenda papers, etc. of the said meetings held from time to time, even though he is a member of the Council.2. Heard Mr. V.K. Jindal, the learned senior Counsel assisted by Mr. S. Jindal, the learned Counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Sen, the learned Counsel for the respondent University.3. The material facts of the case as pleaded by the petitioner are that, he is M.Sc., PhD in Physics from Banaras Hindu University and that he used to work as a temporary lecturer in the Banaras Hindu University and did his Post Doctoral in Germany, USA and UK. He joined the services of the University in the Department of Chemistry and on 18.8.1993, he was appointed as Director, Computer Centre of NEHU, Shillong and since then, he has been leading the aforesai...

Bless Bamon and ors. Vs. State of Meghalaya and ors.

Court: Guwahati

T. Vaiphei, J.1. These writ petitions, arising out of almost identical facts and involving common questions of law were heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment. Whether family pension and other retiral benefits of a deceased Government employee are payable to her/his children through their legal guardian when the widow/widower is alive, but does not claim such benefits, is the short question which falls for consideration in the two writ petitions.2. Mr. V.K. Jindal, the learned senior counsel for the petitioners, Mr. B. Bhattacharjee, the learned Counsel for the State respondents, Mr. R. Debnath, the learned CGC appearing for the Accountant General, Meghalaya and Mr. S. Sen, the learned Counsel for the private respondent in WP (C) No. 45 (SH) of 2005 have been heard at length.3. To simplify the matter, I shall first deal with the facts in WP(C)No. 45(SH) of 2005, decide the same and thereafter apply the outcome thereto to the facts of WP (C) No. 255(SH) of 200...

Bhagaban Chandra Deka and anr. Vs. State of Assam and ors.

Court: Guwahati

B.K. Sharma, J.1. While in the first writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the action on the part of the jurisdictional Inspector of Schools towards handing over charge of the post of Principal of the particular school to the private respondent, the private respondent has filed the second writ petition questioning the legality of the order passed by the Director of Secondary Education, Assam holding that the petitioner in the first writ petition is the senior most Assistant Teacher of the School and consequently entitled to hold the charge of the Principal. It will be pertinent to mention here that by the order so passed by the Director of Secondary Education, Assam he has determined the seniority between one Shri Bipin Chandra Sarma, another Assistant Teacher of the school vis-a-vis the petitioner in the first writ petition. In the order, the petitioner in the second writ petition does not figure, but she is aggrieved by the finding recorded in the order holding that the petit...

Pradyut Dutta Vs. United Bank of India and ors.

Court: Guwahati

I.A. Ansari, J.1. I have heard Mr. G.N. Sahewalla, learned senior counsel, appearing on behalf of the appellant. None has appeared on behalf of the respondent.2. This is an appeal against the judgment and decree, dated 30.5.1994, passed by the learned Assistant District Judge, Tinsukia, in Title Suit No. 21/1988, whereby the respondent's suit has been decreed, on contest with cost, for Rs. 5,16,367.08 with interest @ Rs. 6% per annum from the dale of institution of the suit until recovery of the entire decretal amount with further declaration that the respondents shall have a charge on the hypothecated goods, debts and movable assets of the defendants and shall be entitled to resale thereof for the purpose of recovery of their decreetal dues.3. The respondent-bank instituted Title Suit No. 21/1988 aforementioned, its case being, in brief; thus : The bank had, on 21.4.1975, sanctioned to the defendants overdraft limit of Rs. 40,000 and facilities for purchase of cheques up to a sum of ...