Guwahati Court February 2010 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.
Smt. Purabii Dasgupta (Sarkar) Vs. Arun Kumar Dey and anr.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Feb-19-2010
Reported in: AIR2010Ass66,AIR2010Gau66
ORDERU.B. Saha, J.1. By this application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner made a prayer for the quashing/setting aside the order dated 24-8-2005 passed by the learned civil Judge, Junior Division, Court No. 2, Agartala, West Tripura in Title Suit No. 45 of 2001 whereby and whereunder the instant suit filed by the petitioner as a plaintiff for a decree of mandatory injunction directing the defendants, respondents herein, to remove the fencing illegally erected by them in the suit land and also allow the plaintiff and her family members to reconstruct the said latrine and kitchen and to use them and also to use well standing on the suit land as well as for perpetual injunction restraining the defendant from interfering with the peaceful possession of the plaintiff over the suit land under threat for using the kitchen, latrine, well in the suit land, disposed of on contest being not maintainable in its present form and nature.2. Heard Mr. K.N. Bhattacharjee, ...
State of Tripura Vs. Jyotirmoy Malakar and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Feb-16-2010
Reported in: 2010CriLJ1720
U.B. Saha, J.1. By way of filing this appeal, the State appellant has challenged the judgment and order, dated 10-4-2002, passed by the learned Sessions Judge. North Tripura, Kailashahar in Sessions Trial No. 31 (NT/ K) 2001 whereby and whereunder the accused persons, 16 in number, have been acquitted from the charges levelled against them under Sections 148, 149, 326 of the Indian Penal Code (for short IPC) read with Section 27 of the Arms Act.2. Heard Mr. A. Ghosh, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor for the State appellant and Mr. S. Dutta Choudhary, learned Counsel appearing for the respondents.3. The prosecution case as required to be discussed for disposal of the instant appeal, in short, is that P.W. 1, Sunil Malakar lodged a written F. I. R. with the Officer-in-Charge of Fatikroy Police Station alleging that on 19-8-1994 at about 11.30 p.m. when Jitendra Malakar (P. W. 10), Malay Kanti Bhowmick (P. W. 2), Samar Malakar and Satyendra Deb (P.W.5) were working in the CPI (M) party off...
State of Tripura Vs. Siddik Miah and anr.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Feb-16-2010
Reported in: 2010CriLJ1834
ORDERU.B. Saha, J.1. The instant application is filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 for condoning the delay of 150 days along with an application for granting leave to prefer appeal by the petitioner-State against the order of acquittal dated 27-2-2009 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Sonamura, West Tripura in S.T. 42 (WT/S)/ 2008 acquitting the respondents from the liability of charges framed under Sections 376(1) and 323 of IPC.2. Heard Mr. R. C. Debnath, learned Public. Prosecutor in-charge for the State petitioner, as well as Mr. K. N. Bhattacharjee, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. R. C. Deb, learned Counsel for the respondent accused. .3. In support of the contentions made in the petition for condonation, Mr. Debnath would contend that delay of 150 days caused in filing appeal against the judgment acquitting the respondents is bona fide and not intentional as the State is a machinery impersonal and nobody is looking into the interest of the governme...
Indian Oil Corporation Vs. State of Tripura and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Feb-08-2010
Reported in: (2010)30VST155(Gauhati)
I.A. Ansari, J.1. This writ petition, made under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, puts to challenge the order, dated May 18, 2009 issued by respondent No. 3, namely, Superintendent of Taxes, Charge VII, Agartala, in so far as the same relates to imposition of penalty on the petitioner, which is a public limited company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956, in respect of the assessment year 2003-04.2. The materials facts, which are not in dispute and have given rise to the present writ petition, may be, first, noted.3. The petitioner was a registered dealer under the Tripura Sales Tax Act, 1976 (since repealed and is hereinafter referred to as 'the TST Act'). The petitioner presently holds a certificate of registration as a registered dealer under the Tripura Value Added Tax Act, 2004. A notice under Sub-section (2) of Section 9 read with Sub-section (4) thereof was issued, on June 11, 2009 by respondent No. 3 to the petitioner to produce the accounts and documents for th...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›