Guwahati Court May 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.
Mazir UddIn Vs. State of Assam
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: May-27-2008
Aftab H. Saikia, J.1. Heard Mr. S. Shyam, learned Amicus Curiae for the appellant and Mr. K.C. Mahanta, learned Public Prosecutor representing the State of Assam.2. The conviction of the appellant under Section 302 IPC and sentence to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default of which to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for three months so handed down by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (Ad-hoc), Karimganj by his judgment dated 04.02-2002 rendered in Sessions Case No. 4/2001 while acquitting the another accused Samiruddin, have been assailed in this Criminal Appeal from Jail.3. The prosecution case in brief is that an FIR was lodged on 20.01.1999 by one Nizam Uddin PW 1, alleging that on 19.01.1999 at about 8.00/8.30 p.m. the acquitted person Samiruddin, the father of the accused Mazir Uddin and Mazir Uddin himself assaulted his father, Siraj Uddin (hereinafter referred to as 'the deceased') with some sharp weapon(s) when he returned ...
Lebudhar Chetia @ Lambodhar Chutia Vs. State of Assam
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: May-27-2008
H. Baruah, J.1. The appellant Sri Lebudhar Chetia @ Lambodhar Chutia stood charged under Section 302 IPC for committing murder of one Sailen Neog, s/o- Sri Homeswar Neog (P.W.-10) on 8th day of December, 1993 before the learned Session Judge, Tinsukia in Sessions Case No. 69(T) of 1994. The learned Trial Court at the conclusion of the trial, having found guilty the appellant, convicted and sentenced him under Section 302 IPC and awarded life imprisonment with fine of Rs. 5,000/- in default R.I. for three months Appellant, feeling aggrieved by the judgment and order of conviction dated 17.08.2005 preferred this appeal challenging its legality and correctness.2. Before entering into the merit of this appeal it would perhaps be appropriate for us to make a short survey of the prosecution case. Deceased Sailen and the appellant Sri Lebudhar Chetia @ Lambodhar Chutia were co-villagers. Both of them were living in the same locality of Kachuj an village under the jurisdiction of Tinsukia Pol...
Santi Ram Deka Vs. State of Assam
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: May-27-2008
H. Baruah, J.1. Appellant was an accused before the Adhoc Additional Sessions Judge, Darrang, Mangaldoi in Sessions Case No. 145 (DMFT)/2001. He was charged for an offence punishable under Section 302, IPC by the Adhoc Additional Sessions Judge, Darrang, who found him guilty and convicted for the offence under Section 302, IPC to undergo life imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000/- in default R.I. for three months.2. Feeling aggrieved by the judgment and order of conviction, so rendered by the learned Adhoc Additional Sessions Judge dated 7.3.2002, appellant filed this instant appeal challenging its legality and correctness from Jail.3. Briefly stated, the prosecution case runs as follows:Deceased Maniram Deka was the uncle of the appellant. Both the appellant and the deceased were in their paddy field and both came together home. While the deceased was busy in washing his hands and feet at the tube well, appellant suddenly came with an axe and dealt axe blows on the neck of the...
Krishna Priti Gupta Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: May-27-2008
H. Baruah, J.1. Heard Mr. J.P. Sharma, learned Counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. N. Baruah, learned Asstt. Solicitor General of India for the respondents.2. By this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the legality of the impugned letters dated 16.08.2006 and 09.09.2006 (Annexure- 8 and 9 to the writ petition) and notice dated 2.1.2007 (Anenxure- 12 to the writ petition) and also sought for a direction from this Court to direct the respondent No. 2 to act in terms of Rules 3.3 and 3.4 of the State Bank of India Vigilance Manual (for short the SBI Vigilance Manual).3. The petitioner is a Branch Manager of the State Bank of India, Lerie Branch. A departmental proceeding was instituted against the petitioner for the following charges:Allegation No. 1:It is reported that Shri V. Zango, Registrar, Shri Dielie Vinuo, Superintendent, Shri Tsenro Latha, Audit Officer all from Treasuries & Accounts, Government of Nagaland, Kohirna had applied for personal loan from Lerie Branc...
Raj International Vs. Tripura Jute Mills Ltd.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: May-26-2008
U.B. Saha, J.1. This revision petition under Article 227 of the Constitution has been filed calling in question the legality, correctness and validity of the order dated 25th September, 2007 passed by the Sole Arbitrator in an arbitration proceeding between the parties.2. Heard Mr. S. N. Mitra, learned Counsel who appeared along with Mr. D. Jain, learned Counsel and Mr. R. Dutta, learned Counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. G S. Das, learned Counsel for the respondent Tripura Jute Mills.3. The brief facts leading to the filing of this writ petition are briefly stated as under:On 7th July, 1994, the petitioner had entered into an Agreement with the respondent, Tripura Jute Mills Ltd. a Government Co. (hereinafter referred to as respondent-Jute Mill) which unless extended was to be expired on 31.7.1999. However, either party to the Agreement is/was at liberty to determine the agreement by giving three months notice. Clause No. 49 of the said agreement is reproduced hereunder:49. A...
Management of Maijan Tea Estate Vs. Assam Chah Karmachari Sangha and o ...
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: May-26-2008
I.A. Ansari, J.1. With the help of the present application made under Article 226 read with Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner, namely, the Management of Maijan Tea Estate, has sought for issuance of appropriate Writ(s) setting aside the award, dated 7.12.2002, passed, in Reference Case No. 12/1998, by the learned Labour Court, Dibrugarh, whereby the learned Court below has held that the Management is not justified in dismissing the workman, namely, K.D. Bhattacharjee, from service and has directed accordingly the workman's reinstatement with full back wages.2. I have heard Mr. P.C. Deka, learned Senior Counsel, appearing on behalf of the petitioner, and Mrs. A. Bhattacharjee, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the workman.3.Presenting the case on behalf of the petitioner, Mr. Deka, learned Senior Counsel, has submitted that the findings, recorded by the learned Court below to the effect that the Management was not justified in dismissing the workman, is a fi...
Kshitish Nandi Vs. Hira Dhar and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: May-23-2008
U.B. Saha, J.1. As proposed by this Court and also as agreed to by the learned Counsel for the parties, this revision petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage.2. In this revision petition under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure (for short 'the Code') the petitioner has questioned the legality of the order dated 13.04.2007 passed by the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, North Tripura, Dharmanagar in Civil Misc. 02 of 2007 [Ex. 18(T) of 2001] whereby and whereunder the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division dismissed the application of the petitioner filed under Section 47 of the Code on the ground of limitation.3. Heard Mr. D.K. Biswas, learned Counsel along with Mr. S. Lodh, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Mr. A.M. Lodh, learned senior counsel, assisted by Mr. A. Lodh, learned Counsel for the respondents. Also heard Mr. S. Deb, learned senior counsel, who appeared on request of this Court to assist it.4. For examining the merits of the petition,...
Motsuo Lotha and anr. Vs. State of Nagaland and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: May-23-2008
P.K. Musahary, J.1. Heard Mr. E.Y. Renthungo, learned Counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. L.S. Jamir, learned Senior Government Advocate, appearing on behalf of the respondents.2. The petitioner No. 1 was initially appointed as Carpenter on 3.1.1973 in the scale of pay of Rs. 125-185 p.m. and he was subsequently promoted to the post of Senior Rubber Stamp Maker in the establishment of Directorate of Printing and Stationary, Nagaland. The petitioner No. 2 was also appointed to the post of Carpenter in the same establishment on 14.8.1987 in the scale of pay of Rs. 450-805 p.m. It has been stated by the petitioners that while working as Carpenter, at the subsequent stage they were paid salary in the scale of pay of Rs. 1150-2120 p.m. before coming into force of the Nagaland Services (Revision of Pay) Rules, 1999 (for short ROP Rules).3. In the aforesaid ROP Rules of 1999, the Carpenters in all the Government Departments who have attained the basic pay of Rs. 1150-2120 p.m. have ...
Commissioner of Customs and Central Excise Vs. Assam Asbestos Limited
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: May-23-2008
Aftab H. Saikia, J.1. Heard Mr. H. Rahman, learned Assistant Solicitor General of India (for short,' ASGF) appearing on behalf of the petitioner/Commissioner of Customs and Central Excise, Shillong as well as Dr. A.K. Saraf, learned Counsel assisted by Ms. M.L. Gope, learned Counsel for the respondent.2. This is an application filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 (for short, 'the Act') seeking condonation of inordinate delay of 565 days in preferring the related Central Excise Reference/Appeal.3. It would be pertinent to quote herein the entire petition filed by the Union of India on 13.10.2007 for seeking condonation of delay in question:District: KamrupThe Gauhati High Court(The High Court of Assam, Nagaland, Meghalaya, Manipur, Tripura, Mizqram and Arunachal Pradesh)[Civil Appellate Jurisdiction]Misc. Case No. 3144 of 2007 in Central Excise Ref No. of 2007 ToThe Hon'ble Shri Jasti Chelameswar, B.Sc, B.L., the Chief Justice of the Hon'ble Gauhati High Court and His Lord...
State of Assam and ors. Vs. Pradyut Kumar Choudhury and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: May-23-2008
Amitava Roy, J.1. All these appeals register a challenge to the judgment and order dated 14.12.2007 allowing the writ petitions aforementioned, thus sustaining the assailment to the moderation of the gradings of the writ petitioners in their ACRs with the consequential direction to grant promotion to them to the post of Superintending Engineer in the Pubic Works Department of the State on a reassessment of their cases in the light of the directions contained therein. Whereas, the State of Assam in the Public Works Department (hereinafter referred to as the 'Department') has impugned this decision in Writ Appeal Nos. 41/2008, 42/2008, 43/2008 and 63/2008, some of the candidates already recommended by the Selection Committee for such promotion (also impleaded as respondents in the writ petitions), have taken up the cudgel in Writ Appeal Nos. 51/2008, 52/2008, 53/2008 and 55/2008 against the same decision.2. We have heard Mr AM Mazumdar, Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. S. Saikia, Advocat...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »