Guwahati Court November 2011 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. Ranjana Bala Chanda and Others Vs. the Assistant Registrar, the R ...
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Nov-29-2011
1. The question that arises for consideration in this writ petition is as to whether the death of the husband and father of the petitioners while crossing an unmanned level crossing can be said to be an untoward incident as defined in Section 2(n) of the Railway Claims Tribunal (RCT), 1987 so as to confer jurisdiction to the RCT. In the instant case, the RCT, Guwahati Bench by its order dated 23-10-2003 returned the claim application filed by the petitioners claiming compensation on account of death of the deceased being run over by a passenger train while crossing the particular unmanned level crossing. The prayer in the writ petition is to issue direction to the RCT to entertain the said application and dispose of the same is accordance with law. 2. Shortly stated, the facts leading to filing of the instant writ petition are that the petitioners husband and father while was coming from Bijni Market riding on his bicycle along with another person was hit by MG (UP) passenger train No....
Kazi Nizam UddIn and Others Vs. the State of Assam, Represented by the ...
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Nov-21-2011
Amitava Roy, J. Oral 1. In assailment is the judgment and order dated 22.03.2011 rendered in WP(C) No.5974 of 2010 rejecting the writ appellant/writ petitioner’s challenge to the enquiry conducted into the allegations levelled against him as well as the order dated 20.10.2010 on the basis thereof withdrawing his appointment as provisional Mutawalli of Badarpur Bazar (Railway) Jame Masjid Wakf Estate (for short hereinafter referred to as ‘the estate’). 2. We have heard Mr. B. C. Das, learned Senior Advocate appearing for the appellant and Mr. P. S. Deka, learned State counsel for respondent No.1. 3. For the order that is proposed to be passed it is considered inessential to issue notice to the other respondents. 4. The factual background, in short, has to be sketched for appropriately appreciating the arguments advanced on behalf of the parties present. The appellant was appointed as Mutawalli of the Estate by the order dated 19.8.1995 of the Secretary, Assam Board of ...
Kazi Nizam UddIn and Others Vs. the State of Assam, Represented by the ...
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Nov-21-2011
Amitava Roy, J. Oral 1. In assailment is the judgment and order dated 22.03.2011 rendered in WP(C) No.5974 of 2010 rejecting the writ appellant/writ petitioners challenge to the enquiry conducted into the allegations levelled against him as well as the order dated 20.10.2010 on the basis thereof withdrawing his appointment as provisional Mutawalli of Badarpur Bazar (Railway) Jame Masjid Wakf Estate (for short hereinafter referred to as the estate). 2. We have heard Mr. B. C. Das, learned Senior Advocate appearing for the appellant and Mr. P. S. Deka, learned State counsel for respondent No.1. 3. For the order that is proposed to be passed it is considered inessential to issue notice to the other respondents. 4. The factual background, in short, has to be sketched for appropriately appreciating the arguments advanced on behalf of the parties present. The appellant was appointed as Mutawalli of the Estate by the order dated 19.8.1995 of the Secretary, Assam Board of Wakfs, (for short, he...
Abani Mohan Das and Others Vs. the State of Tripura
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Nov-15-2011
1. The petitioner, set the law in motion presenting an application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C., praying for bail of accused-persons, namely, (1) Sri Ranju Das, (2) Sri Ranjit Das, (3) Sri Satish Paul, (4) Sri Santu Paul, (5) Sri Nikhi Das, and (6) Sri Bijoy Das, in connection with Kailashahar P.S. Case No.98 of 2011, registered under Sections 341/325/302 read with Section 34 of IPC, pending in the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kailashahar. 2. Heard learned counsel, Mr. A. Pal for the petitioners and learned Public Prosecutor, Mr. D. Sarkar, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor, Mr. P. Bhattacharjee as well as learned Special Public Prosecutor, Mr. R.C. Denath for the respondent-State. A serious question of law, involving wide public importance, regarding applicability of the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Tripura 8th Amendment) Act, 2009 (herein referred to as the Amendment Act), in the facts and circumstances of this case, has been raised, calling for a decisi...
Bimal Das and Others Vs. the State of Tripura
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Nov-09-2011
1. This criminal revision petition, under Sections 397 and 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter called "Cr. P. C"), is directed against the judgment and order, dated 24-6-2002, passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Court No.3, West Tripura, Agartala, in Case No. Criminal Appeal 03(1) of 2000. 2. The appeal aforesaid, was preferred by the present petitioners as appellants, challenging the judgment and order of conviction and sentence, dated 4-12-1999, passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, West Tripura, Agartala, in Case No. C. R. 2972/1997, under Section 193 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter called "IPC"). 3. sBy the said judgment and order, dated 4-12-1999, the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, convicted the appellants, under Section 193, I. P. C. and sentenced them to suffer rigorous imprisonment for three years and pay fine of Rs.1,000/- each, in default suffer rigorous imprisonment for another period of three months. 4. The learned Addl. Sessions ...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›