Guwahati Court March 2012 Judgments

Smt. Bulbul Sharma Vs. Vijoy Kumar Sharma

Court: Guwahati

Reported in: 2012AIR(Gau)99

1. The challenge in this appeal is to the judgment and decree, dated 1/6/2006, passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Kamrup, Guwahati, in FC (Civil) No. 82/2003, whereby and whereunder the learned Family Judge, while allowing the petition, filed by the respondent-husband, under section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1995 (hereafter referred to as the Act) dissolved the marriage, solemnised between the appellant and the respondent, on 28/11/1985. 2. We have heard Mr. P.K. Roychoudhury, learned counsel appearing for the appellant and Mr. J. Roy, learned counsel appearing for the respondent. 3. The marriage between the appellant and the respondent was solemnised, on 28/11/1985, at Guwahati, as per Hindu rites and customs. After the said marriage, the appellant used to live with her husband in her matrimonial house at Guwahati. Due to family discord, the respondent-husband, as petitioner, filed an application under section 13(1)(ia) read with section 13(1)(b) of the Act seeki...

Smt. Mandira Nandi Vs. Dilip Kumar Baruah

Court: Guwahati

Judgment and Order (CAV): 1. This is a case of torture of a detenue in police custody. The opposite party was the Superintendent of Police at Karimganj in the year 2002. The allegations against him are that at his instance, the complainant‘s younger brother Subash Nandi @ Babul was arrested by the police officers in connection with Karimganj Police Station Case No.278 of 2000 under Section 147/ 448/ 427/ 5006/ 380 of the IPC on 20.6.2000. Arrest was made on 20.6.2000 and the detenue was released on bail on 21.6.2000 and during this period, the victim was mercilessly beaten by the Opposite party and his personal guards under the orders of the opposite party. 2. With the aforesaid allegations, the injured’s sister Professor Mandira Nandi lodged a complaint on 22.6.2000 in the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Karimganj under Sections 342/ 323/ 325/ 34 IPC. The case was eventually transferred to the Court of learned CJM, Cachar, Silchar, as per the order of the High ...

Rupeshwar Tanti Vs. the State of Assam

Court: Guwahati

Judgment (Oral): 1. This is a unique case inasmuch as a father has been convicted for the offence of rape upon his married daughter. The appellant has been convicted under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code vide Judgment dated 2.2.2006, passed by Sri K Dahotia, learned 2nd Additional Sessions Judge in Sessions Case No. 48 (S-S) of 2005 and the appellant has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 7 years and also to pay fine of Rs.1,000/- with default stipulation of further RI for two months. 2. Being aggrieved with the conviction, the convict has preferred this appeal from jail. 3. Heard Mr. S Barua, Legal Aid Counsel as well as Mr. K Munir, learned Addl.Public Prosecutor for the State. Also perused the impugned judgment and evidence on record. 4. As noted earlier, the victim is an adult woman and she was already married to a boy long before the alleged offence of rape. The prosecution story is that after the death of her mother, the victim woman was fostered by her uncl...

Kusum Chandra Deb Barma Vs. Sunil Chandra Debnath and Others

Court: Guwahati

1. This second appeal was admitted for hearing on the following substantial questions of law: i) Whether refusal to recovery of possession itself can be a ground to refuse declaration of title? ii) Whether the suit can be dismissed on finding of non-joinder of parties without giving opportunity to the other parties to the suit? 2. Heard learned senior counsel, Mr. K.N. Bhattacharjee, assisted by learned counsel Mr. S. Acharjee for the appellant and learned counsel, Mr. P.K. Pal for the respondents. 3. Brief fact, necessary for disposal of the second appeal, may be stated thus: The appellant, as plaintiff, instituted Title Suit No.3/96 in the Court of Civil Judge (Jr. Division), Kamalpur, North Tripura seeking declaration of title and recovery of Khas possession of the suit land prescribed in schedule “Kh” to the plaint recorded in Khatian No.150 Plot No.707 of Mouja - Salema measuring 1.60 acres. The case of the plaintiff was that he purchased the suit land from defendant N...

Md. Abdul Rahim Vs. the Union of India Represented by the Secretary to ...

Court: Guwahati

1. This writ petition is directed against the judgment and order dated 07.07.2011 passed by the Foreigners Tribunal (2nd), Morigaon in FT(D) Case No. 19/2009 (State of Assam Vs. Abdul Rahim) by which the petitioner has been declared to be a foreign national who illegally entered into Assam from Bangladesh after the cut off date, i.e. 25.03.1971. 2. The case projected in the writ petition is that the grandfather of the petitioner Md. Jahed Ali came to India prior to partition and started living in Sahariapam village under Mouza Mairabari, P.S. Laharighat in the District of Nagaon. The petitioner has named his father as Abdul Barek @ Baru Seikh. The petitioner has referred to certain documents of 1955 and 1957 purportedly standing in the said name. 3. Further statement made in the writ petition is that the father of the petitioner was a voter in 1955 and 1970 and he died about 14 years back. The petitioner has also referred to the land document of 1998 purportedly standing in his name. A...

Md. Gul @ Gol Mahmmad Vs. the State of Assam Represented by the Commis ...

Court: Guwahati

1. The petitioner who has been declared to be a foreigner (Bangladeshi national) who entered into Assam after the cut off date, i.e. 25.03.1971, has invoked the writ jurisdiction of this Court to get the said declaration set aside and quashed. The impugned declaration is vide judgment and order dated 01.07.2009 passed by the Foreigners Tribunal (1st) Morigaon in case No. FT(D) 337/2007 (State of Assam vs. Gul Mohammad). The impugned order passed against the petitioner is an ex parte one as he did not respond to the proceeding before the Tribunal in spite of service of notice. 2. I have heard Mr. R. Sarma, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr. H.K. Barman, learned State counsel and Mr. M. Bhagawati, learned CGC. I have also perused the case records received from the Tribunal. Upon such consideration, my findings are as follows: 3. The records of the Tribunal have revealed that the notice of the reference was duly served on the petitioner. As recorded in the order dated 07.08...

National Insurance Company Ltd Vs. Deba Kumar Ojah and Another

Court: Guwahati

Judgment and Order (Oral) 1. This appeal by the insurance company, is directed against the award dated 10.11.2003 (signed on 12.11.2003) passed by the learned Commissioner, Workmen’s Compensation, Kamrup at Guwahati, in W.C. Case No.56/2002, awarding an amount of Rs.89,000/- as compensation with interest @9% per annum from the date of the order till the date of realization and directing the appellant insurance company to satisfy the said award as there is a contract of insurance between the employer and the insurance company. 2. The respondent No.1/workman filed an application under the provisions of the Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1923 (now Employees’ Compensation Act, 1923) claiming compensation contending that while he was discharging his duties as cleaner of the vehicle bearing Registration No.AMP-1994 (Bus) belonging to the respondent No.2, the said bus met with an accident at Dahalapara under Bijni Police Station on National Highway No.31 on 19.02.2002 and as a...

Utpal Roy Barman Vs. Kiriti Roy Barman and Another

Court: Guwahati

S. Talapatra.J. 1. Heard Mr. D. R. Choudhury, learned counsel appearing for the appellant-petitioner and Mr. A.K. Bhowmik, learned senior counsel, assisted by Mr. R. Datta, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.1. 2. Since the appeal under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 could not be filed by the appellant-petitioner in the prescribed period of limitation against the judgment and preliminary decree dated 26.07.2011, passed by the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Court No.2, West Tripura, Agartala in T.S.(P) No. 24 of 2010, this petition under Section 5 of the Limitation Act has been filed by the appellant-petitioner seeking condonation of the delay of 67 days for preferring the said appeal. 3. For assigning cause for delay in preferring the appeal within the prescribed period, the appellant-petitioner averred in paragraph-16 of the petition that the judgment and preliminary decree was passed on 26.07.2011 and due date of presenting the appeal was on or be...

Utpal Roy Barman Vs. Kiriti Roy Barman and Another

Court: Guwahati

S. Talapatra.J. 1. Heard Mr. D. R. Choudhury, learned counsel appearing for the appellant-petitioner and Mr. A.K. Bhowmik, learned senior counsel, assisted by Mr. R. Datta, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.1. 2. Since the appeal under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 could not be filed by the appellant-petitioner in the prescribed period of limitation against the judgment and preliminary decree dated 26.07.2011, passed by the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Court No.2, West Tripura, Agartala in T.S.(P) No. 24 of 2010, this petition under Section 5 of the Limitation Act has been filed by the appellant-petitioner seeking condonation of the delay of 67 days for preferring the said appeal. 3. For assigning cause for delay in preferring the appeal within the prescribed period, the appellant-petitioner averred in paragraph-16 of the petition that the judgment and preliminary decree was passed on 26.07.2011 and due date of presenting the appeal was on or be...

Piyush Chamaria Vs. Hemanta Jitani and Others

Court: Guwahati

Reported in: 2012CrLJ2306

JUDGMENT and ORDER {oral} 1. By order, dated 09-04-2008, passed in the Complaint Case No. 175C/2008, learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Tinsukia, while directing issuance of summons against the three opposite parties herein, who were arraigned, in the complaint, as accused Nos. 1, 2 and 3 respectively, further directed a search warrant to be issued, in terms of the provisions of Section 97 Cr.P.C., for recovery of the complainant-petitioner’s daughter, Shravya Chamaria, from the custody of the accused-opposite party No.3, namely, Sri Deokinandan Bajaj, and directed the Officer-in-Charge of the Police Station concerned to execute the search warrant. However, as the search warrant was not executed on the ground that the child, in question, was within the territorial jurisdiction of the district of Nagaon, the learned Magistrate passed another order, on 18-04-2008, directing the search warrant to be issued to the Superintendent of Police, Nagaon, for execution. 2. Aggriev...