Guwahati Court August 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.
Mrs. Bahara Khatun Vs. the Union of IndiA.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Aug-25-2010
1. Heard Mr. H. Das, learned counsel for the appellant (writ petitioner)). Ms. B. Goyal, learned Govt. Counsel makes submission on behalf of the official respondents. 2. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 4. 6. 2010 in W. P. (C) No. 642/09 whereby the Writ Petition filed by the appellant was dismissed . In the writ proceeding the appellant challenged the orders of the Foreigner's Tribunal, Goalpara in FT 886/G/06 whereby it was declared that the appellant was not an Indian citizen and was a post 25. 3. 1971 migrant from Bangladesh. After the Tribunal's ex parte declaration (since the appellant remained absent on consecutive dates), she sought review of the Tribunal's declaration citing various excuses for her absence. But by a common order dated 3. 1. 09 in four similar review applications, the Tribunal held that no case is made out for recall of its earlier order and accordingly all the four applications were rejected. 3. The appellant contended before the learned Sing...
M/S. H B Enterprise Vs. the State of Assam.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Aug-24-2010
1. Heard Mr. B D Das, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. I Choudhury, learned standing counsel for the Public Works Department (PWD). 2. The issue raised in the writ petition pertains to a road improvement contract work valued of Rs. 2,18,77,351/- allotted initially to the petitioner on 7. 4. 2001. The period of completion of the work was 6 months. After the petitioner completed a portion of the entrusted work, on 15. 5. 2009 a tender notice was issued for the same work i. e. Improvement of Public School approach Road at Panjabari (widening and providing Met. & Bt. including construction of drain from Ch. 500. 00 to 1400. 00 meter. 3. The petitioner challenged the tender notice dated 15. 5. 2009 by filing W P (C) No. 1934/09 by contending that the impugned tender notice has been issued for vested consideration as the works specified in the tender notice of 15. 5. 2009 was the same work entrusted to the petitioner by the earlier work order dated 7. 4. 2001. Pra...
Md. Isab Ali Eusuf Ali Vs. the State of Assam.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Aug-24-2010
1. This appeal is directed against the Judgment dated 31. 07. 2006 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Lakhimpur, North Lakhimpur in Sesssions Case No. 47(NL)/2004, whereby all together 12 accused-appellants were convicted under Section 323 read with Section 149 IPC and were sentenced to undergo R. I. for one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/- each, in default of payment of fine to undergo R. I. for another three months. Further, the appellant, Ajgor Ali, was found guilty for committing offence punishable under Sections 109 read with section 302 IPC and sentenced him to undergo R. I. for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo R. I. for further six months and the accused-appellant, Foyaz Ali, was convicted under Section 302 IPC and sentenced to him to undergo R. I. for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo R. I. for another six months. 2. The prosecution case, in short, is that on 15. ...
Ritu Mahanta Vs. Nilima Das.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Aug-20-2010
1. This revision under Article 227 of the Constitution is directed against the order dated 19-5-2010 passed by the learned Civil Judge, Dibrugarh in Misc. (J) Case No. 72 of 2009 arising out of T. S. No. 44 of 2009 allowing cross-examination of the defendant No. 1 with respect to some of her averments in her written statement as well as her written objection against the application for interim injunction filed by the respondent. For better appreciation of the controversy, it will be profitable to reproduce below the impugned order in toto:19-5-2010: Parties are present through their respective ld. Counsels. The orders in respect of petition No. 677/10 is given below:By the petition No. 677/10 dtd. 18-3-10 Under XIX Rule 2 R/w Sec. 94 and 151 of CPC, the petitioner has prayed to pass directing the O. P. to attend the Hon'ble Court for cross-examination and till then the objection hearing of the case may be deferred for the ends of justice. It is stated in the petition stating, inter ali...
Minawati Gogoi Vs. Gopinath Gogoi.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Aug-20-2010
01. The appellant puts to challenge the judgment and order dated 22. 05. 2006 rendered by the learned Addl. District Judge, Dibrugarh in Title Suit (Divorce) No. 36/2001, rejecting her prayer for a decree for dissolution of marriage between the parties and for permanent alimony. 02. We have heard Mr. K. Agarwal, learned counsel for the appellant-wife and Mr. N. K. Baruah, learned counsel for the respondent-husband. 03. The pleaded versions of the parties, in brief, would essentially lay the preface for the rival contentions. 04. The appellant has averred of her marriage with the respondent according to Hindu religious rites and customs in the month of November, 1983, where after, they set up their matrimonial home at Sassoni Gaon under Naharkatia Police Station in the district of Dibrugarh. She alleged that subsequent thereto, she was subjected to torture by the respondent on the pretext of insufficient dowry and insisted on her to arrange for more from her parents. The torture mounted...
Sri Birendra Kumar Nath Vs. North Eastern Regional Agriculture Marketi ...
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Aug-17-2010
01. The revisional jurisdiction of this Court under section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereafter for short referred to as the Code) has been sought to be invoked to annul the order dated 16. 09. 2009, passed by the learned Civil Judge No. 2, Kamrup, in Misc. (J) Case No. 223/2008, arising out of Money Suit No. 105/2003. Thereby, the related application for condonation of delay for 385 days in filing the accompanying petition, being Misc. (J) No. 224/2008, under Order 9, Rule 13 of the Code had been rejected. Consequently, the application for setting aside the ex-parte judgment and decree has also been rejected. 02. I have heard Mr. BM Choudhury, learned counsel for the petitioner and the CK Sarma Baruah, Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. N Rajkhowa, Advocate for the opposite party/respondent. 03. The run up of facts to the instant petition has to be sketched briefly. The present opposite party instituted the aforementioned suit against the Assam State Co-operative Marketin...
Muslim Ali Vs. the State of Assam and ors.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Aug-16-2010
1. The appellant is aggrieved by an order dated 30th July, 2010 passed by the learned Single Judge in WP (C)No 3413/2010. 2. The official respondents had floated a Short Tender Notice on 17th May, 2010. The tender was for construction of a Drain cum Footpath from Ganesh Mandir to Lakhimijan at Hatigaon with culverts/drain for trapping surface water at Kahilipara junction under devolution of fund of 3rd Assam State Finance Commission (Non salary component)for the year 2009-2010. 3. It appears that as many as five bids were received and in so far as the appellant is concerned, his bid was lowest at Rs. 2,00,49,278. 00. The bid of the private respondent (Young Construction) was at Rs. 2,22,62,796. 00. Writ Appeal No. 259/20104. Notwithstanding the fact that the bid of the appellant was the lowest, the contract was awarded by the official respondents to the private respondent i. e. Young Construction. 5. Feeling aggrieved by this, the appellant preferred a writ petition which came to be di...
Shri Kiran Chandra Phukan Vs. Ms. L.S.Sangsan.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Aug-12-2010
1. We have heard Mr. B. D. Das, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. H. K. Sarma, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mrs. B. Goyal, learned Government Advocate, Assam representing the respondents-contemnors. 2. This contempt application under Section 11 and 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 read with Article 215 of the Constitution of India has been initiated for willful violation of the judgment and order dated 29. 08. 2006 passed by this Court in PIL No. 49 of 2006 and order dated 26. 09. 2006 passed by the learned Single Bench of this Court in W. P. (C) No. 4940 of 2006. 3. Facts leading to the filing of this contempt petition may be stated, in brief, as follows: Sometime in 2005, the respondent authorities had demolished boundary walls and other permanent structures belonging to the local residents adjacent to the petitioners' land, without following any procedure of law and without issuing any notice. Apprehending demolition of their residential and commercial building...
Jayshree Tea and Industries Limited Vs. the Customs, Excise and Servic ...
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Aug-11-2010
1. The appellant is aggrieved by an order dated 2nd September, 2009 passed by the Custom, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, East Zonal Bench, Kolkata in Excise Appeal No. EDM-16/2005. 2. The substantial question of law led by the appellant is(i) Whether the Custom and Central Excise was correct in law in coming to the conclusion that the question of unjust enrichment has come to an end after the decision of the Division Bench of the Gauhati High Court in Civil Rule No. 3499/1991 decided on 13th July, 1991 and it was no longer res integra in so far as the Assistant Collector of Central Excise is concerned. 2. The appellant is the manufacturer of plywood and aqua solution of urea and phenol. The question raised is whether the captive consumption of aqua solution of phenol and urea was excisable to Central Excise duty under the Tariff entry of the Central Excise and Salt Act, 1944 (now the Central Excise Act). 3. The view taken by the Division Bench of this Court in Civil Rule No...
Sri Haren Kalita Vs. Gauhati High Court.
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Aug-10-2010
01. In assailment is the order dated 13. 03. 2006 of the Registrar (Admn. ), Gauhati High Court, Guwahati conveying the decision of dismissal of the writ petitioner from service as a disciplinary measure, as well as of the rejection of his departmental appeal preferred against the same. 01. We have heard Mr. A. K. Bhattacharjee, Senior Advocate for the petitioner and Mr. C. K. Sarma Baruah, Senior Advocate appearing for the respondents. 02. Briefly stated, the petitioner's pleaded version is that after having joining the services of this Court in the year 1972 as a Typist, he was promoted to the rank of Lower Division Assistant in the year 1988 and was at the relevant time posted in the Copying Section as the In-charge thereof. A departmental proceeding was initiated against him in the year 2000 under the Gauhati High Court Services (Appointment, Condition of Services and Conduct) Rules, 1967(hereinafter for short referred to as the Rules) leveling the following charge-"That while work...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »