Guwahati Court September 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.
Meghnath Saikia Vs. Xinmin
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Sep-09-2008
H.N. Sarma, J.1. Legality and validity of the appellate judgment and order dated 25.4.07 passed in Case No. 2867c/2000; 2868c/2000 and 2869c/ 2000 thereby affirmed the conviction but modified the sentence imposed upon the petitioner by the learned trial court in case No. 17,18 and 19/2004 is the subject matter of challenge in this batch of revision petition. The impugned judgment having been passed analogously and the learned Counsel having been agreed for disposal by a common judgment, these revision petitions are heard analogously and disposed of by this common judgment.2. I have heard Mr. GP Bhowmik, learned Counsel for the accused/petitioner and Mr. A. Bora, learned Counsel who enters appearance on behalf of the complainant/respondent.3. The complainant/respondent is a proprietorial firm and authorized dealer of BPL, Telecom Ltd. Products for the North East Region. During the course of business transaction, the accused petitioner being liable to pay certain amount to the complaina...
Hemanta Bhattacharjee and ors. Vs. State of Assam and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Sep-09-2008
Amitava Roy, J.1. These appeals script a third bout of relentless, obdurate and animated legal tussle for seniority in the Assam Police Service (hereinafter to as the 'Service') between two classes of recruits. Their induction had been on the basis of two independent processes claimed to be drawn up under the Assam Police Service Rules, 1966 (hereafter referred to as the 'Rules') in the Junior Grade of the service. At this point of time, most of them as is submitted at the Bar, have been promoted to the Senior Grade.2. The appellants in Writ Appeal No. 448/2004 and 465/2004 assert to be special recruits contemplated under Section 5(1)(c) of the Rules. Leading the challenge in the rival faction is the appellant in Writ Appeal No. 459/2004, a recruit under Rule 5(1)(a) of the Rules. For the sake and convenience, two classes of recruits as above are hereafter referred to as special recruits and direct recruits respectively. The challenge in principal is against the judgment and order dat...
Smt. Chaya Rani Dey Vs. Sunil Kumar Paul and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Sep-09-2008
B.P. Katakey, J.1. The appellant herein as plaintiff instituted TS 3/1980 on 5-4-1980 in the Court of learned Asstt. District Judge at Karimganj, which was subsequently transferred to the Court of the learned Civil Judge (Jr. Division) No. 1 (now, Munsiff No. 1) at Karimganj and re-numbered as TS 284/1993, praying for declaration of her occupancy right in respect of the land measuring 2 bighas, described in Schedule to the plaint, for confirmation of possession as well as for declaration that the sale deed dated 20-5-1977 executed by the predecessor in interest of the present proforma respondent Nos. 5 to 8 is void, fake, fraudulent and inoperative and also for permanent injunction against the respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3 (defendant Nos. 1, 2 & 3 in the suit). The suit was contested by the defendant Nos. 1, 3 and 5 by filing a joint written statement. The plaintiff in the suit contended inter alia that she is in possession of the land by virtue of the purchase vide sale deed dated 18-5-...
Dr. Ranjit Reang Vs. State of Tripura and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Sep-08-2008
Hrishikesh Roy, J.1. Heard Mr. P. Rathor, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. S. Chakraborty, learned Govt. Advocate who represents the official respondents.2. The petitioner, a Medical Officer, posted in a Government Dispensary under Dhalai District has filed the present petition seeking appropriate action against the Tripura Government and the Police Authorities for the unauthorised detention and physical assault on the petitioner by the police when they took him into custody on 2-7-1998 till his release the next day without registering any case against the petitioner.3. All circumstances pertaining to the instant writ petition need not be narrated since the District and Sessions Judge, West Tripura, conducted an inquiry into the incident and a report in this regard was submitted by the Judge on 10-12-1998.4. From the inquiry report dated 10-12-1998 of the District and Sessions Judge who has referred to the evidence of the eye-witnesses (PW-4 and PW-5), who ...
K. Panger Jamir and ors. Etc. Vs. State of Nagaland and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Sep-05-2008
P.K. Musahany, J.Heard Mr. A Zhimoml, learned Counsel for the petitioners and Mr. L. S. Jamir, learned senior Govt. Advocate for the official Respondents.1. These two Writ Petitions raise common issues, both in facts and law, and have been heard and considered together, they are being disposed of by this common judgment and order. For the sake of convenience, the essential facts are being noted from WP (Crl.) No. 2(K)/07.2. Looking back a little. Prior to formation of the State of Nagaland on 1.12.1963, the only enactment concerning the conduct of the Government servants was the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946, which was in force in the erstwhile Nagaland Hills Tuensang Areas of both Kohima and Mokokchung Districts. It was vide Assam Regulation No. XII of 1951 and vide Act 3 of 1951, the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 (now amended in 1988), came into force in the Naga Hills Tuensang in the District of Kohima and Mokokchung respectively vide Assam Government's Notifica...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›