Guwahati Court March 2009 Judgments

Chitta Ranjan Kar Vs. State of Tripura and ors.

Court: Guwahati

Reported in: AIR2009Gau94

ORDERU.B. Saha, J.1. This petition under Section 114 read with Order 47 of the CPC is filed for review of the judgment and decree dated 4-12-2006 passed in R. F. A. 39 of 2001 dismissing the appeal of the appellant petitioner on merit in absence of the learned Counsel for the parties, preferred under Section 96 read with Order 41 of the CPC against the judgment and decree dated 25-9-2001 passed by the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Court No. 1, West Tripura, Agartala in Money Suit No. 25 of 2000, whereby, the claim of the appellant petitioner was rejected.2. Aggrieved by, the appellant petitioner filed special leave petition before the Hon'ble Supreme Court seeking special leave to Appeal (Civil) No. 6149 of 2007 which was also dismissed on withdrawal. The order of the Apex Court reads as follows:Learned Counsel for the petitioner wants to withdraw this petition stating that she will move the High Court.The Special Leave Petition is dismissed as withdrawn.3. The case of the appe...

Jaintia Alloys P. Ltd. and ors. and Premier Cryogenics Ltd. Vs. Union ...

Court: Guwahati

Reported in: [2010]320ITR442(Gauhati)

1. Both the writ petitions having raised common questions of law were heard together and are being disposed of by this common order.2. We have heard Dr. A. K. Saraf, learned senior counsel for the petitioners in both the cases and Shri U. Bhuyan, learned standing counsel, Income-tax Department.3. The challenge in the writ petitions is against the notices issued by the respondents under Section 154 of the Income-tax Act for rectification of the assessments of the petitioners for the assessment year 2001-02. The writ petitioners have also challenged the validity of the provision of Section 115JB of the Income-tax Act of 1961 in so far as it seeks to impose tax on the industrial units owned by the petitioners. The challenge made in the writ petition lies within a short compass. According to the petitioners, under Section 80IB of the Act, industrial undertakings located in a industrially backward State specified in Eighth Schedule to the Act are eligible for 100 per cent. deduction of the ...

State of Tripura and anr. Vs. Smt. Gayetri Acherjee and ors.

Court: Guwahati

Reported in: AIR2009Gau107

B.D. Agarwal, J.1. This appeal by the State of Tripura has been filed assailing the judgment and award dated 23-9-1999 passed by the learned Member, Motor Accident Claim Tribunal Court No. 2. West Tripura. Agartala in T.S. No. (MAC)/116/93. By this Impugned Judgment apart from awarding a sum of Rs. 2,33,000/- ,as compensation to the legal heirs of this deceased Under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short the 'Act') the Tribunal has directed that the award shall be satisfied by the Inspector General of Police. Govt. of Tripura since the said officer had hired the offending vehicle at the relevant period.2. I have heard Shri T.D. Mazumder, learned Counsel for the appellants. Shri H.K. Bhowmik, learned Counsel for the respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3 and Shri S.M. Chakraborty, learned Senior Counsel for the respondent Nos. 4, and 5. The respondent No. 6 who was impleaded in the claim application on the premise that the vehicle was, in fact sold to him before the accident took-p...

Srei Infrastructure Finance Ltd. Vs. Bhageeratha Engineering Ltd. and ...

Court: Guwahati

Reported in: AIR2009Gau110

ORDERH. Baruah, J.1. By this common Order, it is proposed to dispose of both the C. M. Applications being No. 118 of 2008 and 119 of 2008 since in both the applications the same question of law and facts are involved.2. By application under Section 151 of the CPC registered as C M. Application No. 118 of 2008, the applicant SREI Infrastructure Finance Ltd. (formerly known as International Financial Ltd.) prays for intervention and impleadment as respondent No. 2 in RFA No. 5 of 2008. By another application preferred under Section 151 of CPC which has been registered as. CM. Application No. 119 of 2008, the applicant has sought for an order to allow the receiver to take possession of the equipments and removal of the same so as to enable to comply the terms of settlement dated 29-3-2006, arbitral award dated 28-9-2006 and Order dated 2.3-2-2007 of the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court.3. Facts involved in these applications can be summarized as under:The applicant is a Ltd. Company duly incor...

Uttam Das and ors. Vs. State of Tripura

Court: Guwahati

Hrishikesh Roy, J.1. Heard Mr. P. K. Biswas, learned Counsel appearing for the appellants. Also heard Mr. A. Ghosh, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor who represents the State.2. All 4 appellants herein have been convicted under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the I.P.C. and have been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and have also been sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/- and in default, suffer further imprisonment for 1 (one) month by the judgment dated 2-12-2004 rendered by the learned Sessions Judge, West Tripura, Agartala in Sessions Case No. 136{WT/A)/2002. Appellants Uttam Das, Dilip Das and Rina Das (Saha) are son and daughter of the appellant Maya Das.3. The prosecution case as revealed from the F. I. R. lodged by mother of Shefali Das (deceased) is that Shefali Das who was residing in the house of one Sankar Das, left her employer's house on 3-5-2000 at about 10 o'clock in the morning telling that she will visit her mother. On 5-5-2000 at about 2 o'clock in the a...

Smt. Renubala Nama and ors. Vs. Smt. Renubala Das

Court: Guwahati

B.D. Agarwal, J.1. This second appeal at the instance of the plaintiff is directed against the judgment and decree dated 13-5-1999 passed by the learned Addl. District Judge, West Tripura, Agaitala in Title Appeal No. 42 of 1993 affirming the judgment and decree passed by the learned Sr. Civil Judge No. 2, West Tripura, Agartala in T. S. No. 214 of 1993, whereby the trial Court has dismissed the suit of the plaintiff on the ground of maintainability.2.I have heard Sri D. Chakraborty, learned Counsel for the appellant (now through legal heirs). The sole respondent is represented by Dr. H. K. Bhattacharjee, learned advocate. I have also perused the impugned judgments and the records.3. Brief facts leading to the filing of the suit and this appeal are that the suit property originally belonged to one Sri Pyari Mohan Saha and Sri Manmohan Das. The land was sold by these two persons to one Sri Jamini Kanta Das, Kamini Kanta Das and Sachindra Malakar in the year 1957 through two different sa...

Birendra Rudrapaul Vs. Nikunja Behari Debnath through LR's

Court: Guwahati

Reported in: AIR2009Gau114

B.D. Agarwal, J.1. This Second Appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 19-4-1999 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, West Tripura, Agartala in T. A. No. 52 of 1997 affirming the Judgment and decree dated 12-5-1997 passed by the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Court No. 1, West Tripura, Agartala in T. S. No. 42 of 1991. Being aggrieved with the concurrent decrees the appellant has preferred this Second Appeal.2. I have heard Mr. D.R. Choudhary, learned Counsel for the appellant and Mr. M. K. Bhowmik, learned Senior counsel for the legal heirs of the respondents. I have also perused the impugned judgment and decree of the learned trial Court.3. The facts giving rise to the filing of the suit are that the appellant was the 'Bargadar'/Under Raiyat of the plaintiff/respondents. Sometime in the year 1987 the plaintiff i.e. the owner of the land took a sum of Rs. 3000/- as loan from the appellant. Another sum of Rs. 5000/- as loan was again taken from the '...

State of Arunachal Pradesh Vs. Babulal Kimsim

Court: Guwahati

P.K. Musahary, J.1. This criminal reference has been preferred under Section 30 of the Assam Frontier (Administration of Justice) Regulation, 1945 for confirmation of sentence of rigorous imprisonment of 10 years and a fine of Rs. 1000/- handed down on the convict by the Judgment and order dated 30-8-2007 passed by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Eastern Zone, Namsal, Arunachal Pradesh convicting the accused, Babulal Kimsim under Section 376, IPC and sentencing him to undergo R.I. for 10 (ten) years and a fine of Rs. 1,000/- and in default, of payment of fine to undergo further term of simple imprisonment for 1 (one) month.2. This Court by an order dated 6-1-2009, since none appeared on behalf of the convict-appellant, appointed Mr. P. K. Tiwari, learned Counsel as amicus curiae to assist this Court.3. We have heard Mr. N. Lowang, learned Public Prosecutor for the State of Arunachal Pradesh and Mr. P. K. Tiwari, learned amicus curiae, appearing on...

Rajiv Phukan and anr. Vs. the State of Assam

Court: Guwahati

Reported in: 2010CriLJ338

I.A. Ansari, J.1. Whether a statement, which is popularly known as 'disclosure statement', must be reduced into writing in order to make such a statement admissible in evidence, under Section 27 of the Evidence Act, is the question, which this reference has to answer.2. The material facts, which have led to this reference, may, in brief, be set out as under:(i) In Pandav Koya v. State of Assam reported in 2006 (1) GLT 267, a Division Bench of this Court took the view that Section 27 of the Evidence Act would not be applicable if the accused person's statement, which is alleged to have led to the discovery of a fact, has not been reduced into writing.(ii) In Anup Nath and Ors. v. State of Assam reported in : 2008 (1) GLT 255 : 2008 Cri LJ (NOC) 605, another Division Bench, however, took the view that Section 27 of the Act will not cease to be applicable merely because of the fact that the disclosure statement, made by the accused, has not been reduced into writing.(iii) Yet another Divi...

Harez Ali and anr. Etc. Vs. State of Assam and ors. Etc.

Court: Guwahati

Reported in: AIR2009Gau132

A.C. Upadhyay, J.1. This Full Bench has been constituted to resolve the controversy arising from divergent views expressed by this High Court on construction and interpretation of Sub-section (6) of Section 109 of the Assam Panchayat Act, 1994 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). Though the controversy falls within a very narrow compass of interpretation of expression 'yearly sale value', in 'the Act', nonetheless, it entails a question of public importance in view of the confusion produced by conflicting observations of different Benches of this High Court. The expression, 'yearly sale value' is not defined expression in 'the Act', however, Sub-section (6) of Section 109 of the Act provides that if the 'yearly sale value' of the Hats, Ferries and Fisheries, falling under any Anchalik Panchayat, within the jurisdiction of Zilla Parishad exceeds Rs. 1 lakh, it shall be settled by the Zilla Parishad. The moot question which arises for consideration of this Court in this reference are ...