Guwahati Court April 2008 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.
Dipak Thakur Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Apr-09-2008
H.N. Sarma, J.1. Being aggrieved by the refusal of the Respondent-Bank to promote the petitioner from clerical cadre to Scale-I Officer(Group A) on the ground of alleged misinterpretation of the relevant service rule and promoting the private respondents, the petitioner has approached this Court by filing this writ petition and challenges the action of the Respondent-Bank.2. Heard Mr. R.P. Sarma, learned Senior Counsel for the writ petitioner. Also heard Mr. S. Dutta, learned Counsel for the Bank and Mr. P. Deka, learned Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 7 and 10 and Respondent Nos. 13 to 18. Mrs. Phukan represents the State respondents.3. The broad facts are not in dispute rather admitted one. The petitioner was appointed in the Respondent-Bank on 1.9.1981 as Clerk-cum-Cashier and since then he is serving in the said post. Under the relevant service rule the promotion to the cadre of Scale-I Officer is to be made on the basis of seniority-cum-merit. The set of rules known as Regional R...
Musstt Anowara Khatun Vs. Monnaf Ali Ahmed
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Apr-07-2008
D. Biswas, J.1. This revision is directed against the Judgment and Order dated 30.11.1999 passed by the learned Session Judge, Barpeta in Criminal Motion No. 9/1998 setting aside the Judgment and Order 3.2.1998 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Barpeta in Case No. 104M/96 under Section 125 CrPC. The learned Chief Judicial Magistrate has granted maintenance at the rate of Rs. 300 per month to the petitioner-wife.2. I have heard Mr. A.S. Choudhury, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. S.A. Laskar, learned counsel for the opposite party. 3. The petitioner herein as First Party filed an application under Section 125 CrPC against her husband, the opposite party, for maintenance. The facts of the case in brief is that the petitioner was married to the opposite parry according to Sariyat and Muslim Rites and they stayed together for about three months as husband and wife. The opposite party started harassing the petitioner physically and mentally and eventually drove her...
Laxmi Bricks Industries Vs. State of Tripura and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Apr-04-2008
Maibam B.K. Singh, J.1. This is to dispose Civil Rule No. 332 of 1998, Civil Rule No. 333 of 1998 and Civil Rule No. 334 of 1998 wherein common and related questions of facts and laws are involved.2. I have heard Mr. S.C. Saha, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner in the three cases and Mr. A. Ghosh, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the State-respondents.3. There is no dispute in respect of the following facts:The petitioner is a registered dealer under the Tripura Sales Tax Act, 1976 (hereinafter referred to as, 'the Act') as a manufacturer and seller of bricks, brick bats, etc. The Superintendent of Taxes, Charge-I, Agartala made a consolidated order of assessment ex parte in respect of the petitioner on September 7, 1996 summarily under Section 9(4) of the Act for the assessment years 1993-94, 1994-95 and 1995-96. The said summary assessment was purportedly made on failure of the petitioner to appear and produce relevant records and books of account inspite o...
Ratan Acharjee Vs. State of Tripura
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Apr-04-2008
P.K. Musahary, J.1. By a judgment dated 31.03.2006 passed in Sessions Trial No. S.T. 52(W.T./A) of 2005 by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, West Tripura, Agartala, Court No. 2, the accused appellant was convicted under Section 376(1) IPC and sentenced to suffer R.I. for seven years and to pay a fine of Rs. 2.000/- in default to suffer RI for another six months. Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the same, the accused appellant has preferred this appeal.2. The prosecution case as unfolded during the trial, in short is that on 04.10.2004 the prosecutrix was admitted to GB Hospital, Agartala for treatment of her jaundice. When she was undergoing treatment, the accused Shri Ratan Acharjee visited the said hospital as arranged by the father of the prosecutrix for her treatment with charms and incantation. He treated the prosecutrix in this way for three consecutive days and there after asked her to attend his house for continuation of the treatment as per his method. The prosecutrix...
Bikash Das Vs. State of Tripura
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Apr-04-2008
P.K. Musahary, J.1. Browsing the ejahar and other records, the prosecution case may be stated like this. On 08.01.1999, Friday, at about 6.30/6.45 pm, while the informant Shri Pradip Kumar Goswami, was busy in packing clothes etc., in the southern part of his dwelling hut as a preparation for proceeding in the next morning to Silchar for treatment, suddenly an unknown person, whose face was covered by black cloth, entered the room and asked him to give money, gold etc., by showing a pistol like weapon. The miscreant forcibly took away cash amount of Rs. 1500/- and a wrist watch on which his name was inscribed. At the same time, other 2/3 miscreants whose faces were also covered by black clothes forcibly entered the western part of the dwelling hut and by showing pistol like weapon took away gold necklace from his mother's neck and two bangles and a pair of earrings from his wife including his two battery torch light. The miscreants stayed about 5/7 minutes and went away towards the we...
Uttam Debbarma Vs. State of Tripura
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Apr-04-2008
P.K. Musahari, J.1. Heard Mr. Dhiraj Guha, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the accused-appellant. Also heard Mr. R.C. Debnath, learned P.P. incharge for the State respondent.2. A criminal case set in motion with the lodging of an Ejahar by informant, PW-4, wherein it was stated that while his son Kamal Roy Barman, aged 21 years, along with Nepal Das visited the house of Badal Debbarma at Hariakubra between 8.15 p.m. and 8.30 p.m., two tribal youths came to the room of Badal Debbarma and forcibly kidnaped Kamal Roy Barman. Aforesaid Nepal Das came to the bazaar where Badal Debbarma and Kamal Roy Barman are running a shop and informed the informant's wife that extremists had kidnapped Kamal Roy Barman for ransom. The informant reported the matter orally and the same was recorded by S.I. of Police Benu Lal Kar (P.W. 6) at Takarjala market on 25-8-99 at 10.05 p.m. On the basis of said Ejahar a crime being Takarjala P.S. Case No. 44/99 was registered under Section 448/364A, I.P.C. O...
Rajendra Prasad Borah Vs. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Apr-03-2008
Amitava Roy, J.1. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India registers a challege to the order dated 23.8.2007 passed by the learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Guwahati Bench, Guwahati (hereinafter referred to as the 'Tribunal') dismissing four appeals being ITA Nos. 29/Gau/2006, 30/Gau/2006, 35/Gau/2006 & 36/Gau/2006 filed by the petitioner assessee before it against the assessment orders dated 21.12.2005, 21.12.2005, 20.12.2005 & 20.12.2005 for the assessment year 1990-91, 1991-92, 1988-89 & 1989-90 respectively.2. I have heard Mr. A.K. Roy Choudhury, Senior Advocate assisted by Ms. S. Roy Choudhury and Mr. Manash Haloi, Advocates for the petitioner and Mr. U. Bhuyan, learned Standing counsel, Revenue assisted by Mr. B. Chakraborty and Ms. K. Medhi, Advocates.3. The un-rebutted pleaded facts in short as would be necessary for disposing of the represent petition are that, the petitioner assessee being aggrieved by the aforementioned orders of the Assistant Commi...
Madan Kalita Vs. State of Assam and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Apr-03-2008
H.N. Sarma, J.1. Heard Mr. B. Banerjee, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Mr. C. K. Sarma Baruah, learned Senior Counsel for the Respondent No. 4. Mrs. Phukan represents the State respondents.2. Refusal to exercise jurisdiction by the Assam Board of Revenue to interfere with the judgment and order dated 21.10.1991 impugned in 28 RA(K)/92 has led the petitioner/tenant to approach this Court by filing this application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, challenging the said decision.3. The relevant factual matrix as emerged from the pleadings of the parties, as projected in this petition, are as follows:The father of the petitioner late Bahiram Kalita was a tenant in respect of an area of land measuring 20 bighas, 3 kathas and 4 lee has of land covered by Dag No.286 situated at villageBeltola, District - Kamrup, Assam.4. While the Assam (Temporarily Settled Districts) Tenancy Act, 1935 was in operation, the father of the petitioner was issued a tenancy Khatian being a K...
Jagrit Foods Pvt. Ltd. and ors. Vs. United Bank of India and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Apr-03-2008
T.N.K. Singh, J.1. As agreed to by the learned Counsel appearing for the parties and also in the interest of Justice, this writ petition is taken up for disposal at this stage.2. Admittedly, the petitioner company obtained loan as well as over drafts facilities for an amount of Rs. l(one) crore for loan and Rs. 3(three) crores as over draft from the United Bank of India, having its branch office at Asaf Ali Road, New Delhi. It is alleged that as the borrower i.e. the petitioner No. 1 Company had failed to repay the loan as per the terms and conditions of the agreement entered into between the borrower-the petitioner No. 1 Company and the secured creditor - United Bank of India, the Secured Creditor (United Bank of India) had issued impugned notice dated 16-10-2006 under Section 13(2) of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (for short Act, 2002) to the borrower petitioner No. 1 Company for taking up steps mentioned in ...
Smt. Nandita Acharjee Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Apr-03-2008
I.A. Ansari, J.1. The petitioner, Smt. Nandita Acharjee, carries on a business of money-lending under the name and style of Hindustan Mortgage Institution. The petitioner's husband, Parima Acharjee, is lecturer in Lumding College. The petitioner and also her husband are assessees under the Income-tax Office, Nagaon. Having completed the assessment of income-tax payable by the petitioner in respect of the assessment years 2000-01, 2001-02, 2002-03 and 2003-04, demand notices were issued to the petitioner on March 31, 2006. In terms of the demand notices, the petitioner was to make payment within a period of 30 days from the date of service of the notice. As the petitioner had not paid the assessed tax till May 16, 2006, a letter was issued, on May 16, 2006, by the Department concerned requesting the petitioner to pay the assessed income-tax within ten days of the receipt of the said letter. Responding to this letter, the petitioner submitted a representation, on May 29, 2006, to the In...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »