Guwahati Court June 2013 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.
Drillmec S.P.a Vs. Oil India Limited and Others
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Jun-28-2013
Judgment and Order, (Cav) 1. Drillmec S.p.A., a Company registered in Italy and working in the area of manufacture and supply of land rigs for the purpose of exploration and development of Oil and Gas, has filed the present petition praying for a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the Oil India Limited (in short, OIL) to settle the tender process initiated vide tender notices Nos.SDG9008P11/07 and SDG7289P13/07 in strict compliance of the mandatory provisions of law and other guidelines formulated and also restraining the respondent OIL from awarding the contract in favour of the respondent No.4, apart from a direction to award the contract in favour of the petitioner by quashing the 430th meeting of the Corporate Business Committee (in short, CBC) held on 27th December, 2012 in relation to the aforesaid tender notices, contending inter alia that though the petitioner, the respondent No.4 and the respondent No.5 were found to be technically responsive in the technical bids, there...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Mrs. Gita Rani Ghosh, Proprietor
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Jun-28-2013
Judgment and Order: Ansari, J. 1. This is an appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, (in short, the Act) impugning the order, dated 19.03.2010, passed, by the learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Guwahati Bench, in ITA No.132 (Gau)/2007, for the assessment year 2002-2003, whereby the learned Tribunal has allowed the appeal of the assessee-respondent by taking the view that the assessment, which was challenged in the appeal before the learned Tribunal, being without service of any notice under Section 143(2) or 142(1) of the Act, was illegal and void ab initio. 2. The appeal has been admitted, on the following substantial question of law for hearing: Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified and correct in law in declaring the assessment order as illegal and void ab initio and in canceling the same by holding that no notice under Section 143(2) or 142(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, was served on the respondent and is not the ...
Rupesh Kumar Shah Vs. State of Assam
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Jun-27-2013
Judgment and Order, (Cav) 1. This criminal appeal has been filed against the judgment and order dated 24-12-2008 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Tinsukia in Sessions Case No.117 (T)/2007 convicting the appellant u/s 376 (2) (f) IPC and sentencing him to suffer rigorous imprisonment (RI) for ten years and to pay fine of Rs.5000/-, in default, to undergo further RI for six months. 2. Facts of the case may be briefly noted. 3. On 13-05-2006, one Shri Rameshwar Singh of Chirwapatty, Tinsukia lodged a first information before the Tinsukia police station stating that at about 2:15 in the afternoon of that day, the appellant, who was a co-tenant and living in the next room on rent, by enticing his six years old daughter with money took her to his room and after closing the door committed rape on her. The first information was registered as Tinsukia police station case No.222/2006 u/s 376 (2) (f) IPC. Police investigated the case and after completion of the investigation, submitted charg...
Shekhar Barek Vs. State of Assam
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Jun-26-2013
Judgment and Order, (Oral) Ansari, J. 1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order, dated 29.03.2010, passed, in Sessions Case No.133/2005, by the learned Sessions Judge, Kokrajhar, convicting the accused-appellant under Section 302 IPC and sentencing him to suffer imprisonment for life and pay fine of rupees five thousand and, in default of payment of fine, suffer rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months. 2. The case of the prosecution, as unfolded at the trial, may, in brief, be described as under: (i) Deceased Subhash Saha, a tailor by profession, worked at the verandah of the shop of Jayanta Sarma (PW4) situated opposite Ranjali Supermarket, Kokrajhar Town. On 01.10.2003, Reena Saha (PW2), wife of Subhash Saha (since deceased), went to the shop of PW4 carrying meals for her husband and, after Subhash Saha had taken his meals, PW2 started back for her house. While, however, she was returning home, she (PW2) happened to meet accused Shekhar Barek, whose house was...
Ghana Gogoi Vs. the State of Assam
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Jun-18-2013
Judgment and Order Ansari, J. 1. This is an appeal against the judgement and order, dated 13.06.2008, passed, in Sessions Case No. 33 (S-C) 2007, by the learned Sessions Judge (FTC), Sivasagar, convicting the accused-appellant, Ghana Gogoi, under Section 302 IPC and sentencing him to suffer imprisonment for life and pay fine of Rs. 2,000/- and, in default of payment of fine, suffer simple imprisonment for a period of 2 (two) months. 2. The case of the prosecution, as unfolded at the trial, may, in brief, be described thus: (i) Deceased, Ila Gogoi, was the wife of the accused and they used to live together with their son. On 13.06.2006, at about 5-30 P.M., the accused gave several blows to his wife, by means of dao, causing injuries on her person. On hearing Ila Gogoi crying out of pain, people from the neighbourhood came and saw the accused, Ghana Gogoi, standing near his wife, holding a dao in his hand. The accused was caught hold of by his brother and other co-villagers and the dao w...
Nitul Hazarika @ Nigun Vs. State of Assam
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Jun-17-2013
Judgment and Order, (Oral) Ansari, J. 1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order, dated 03.03.2009, passed, in Sessions Case No.23 (NL) of 2008, by the learned Sessions Judge, Lakhimpur, convicting the accused-appellant, Nitul Hazarika @ Nigun, under Section 302 IPC and sentencing him to suffer imprisonment for life and pay fine of rupees three thousand and, in default of payment of fine, undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months. 2. The case of the prosecution, as unfolded at the trial, may, in brief, be described as under: (i) On 25.07.2006, at about 8 pm, Mahananda Bania was heard screaming that accused, Nitul, had assaulted him. Having heard Mahananda so screaming, when Durga Bora (PW2) went running towards his gateway, where the screams were being raised, he found Mahananda, in injured condition, at his gateway, and accused Nigun running away towards his house. PW2 (Durga Bora) chased the accused to some distance; but, on seeing the accused entering i...
Mrs. Shyamali Chakraborty and Others Vs. Sadhan Chakraborty and Others
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Jun-12-2013
Oral: 1. These appeals by the successors-in-interest of the original plaintiff, Bimalendu Chakraborty, are directed against the judgment and decree dated 23.05.2002 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division) No.2, Cachar at Silchar, in Title Appeal Nos.3/1994 and 5/1994, dismissing the former and partly allowing the later, by partly setting aside the judgment and decree dated 11.10.1993 passed by the learned Sadar Munsiff No.2, Cachar at Silchar in Title Suit No.120/1991. 2. The predecessor-in-interest of the present appellants instituted the said suit praying for passing a decree declaring the plaintiffs prescriptive right of access and implied grant of necessity and easement over the path described in Schedule-3 to the plaint and also for permanent injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with the peaceful enjoyment or putting any obstruction therein, contending inter alia that Bimalendu Chakraborty, the original plaintiff, since the purchase of Schedule-2 land...
Ripun Bora and Another Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and Another
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Jun-11-2013
Judgment and Order, (Cav) 1. The order dated 01.09.2012 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kamrup, Gauhati in Sessions Case No.60(K) of 2010 is under challenge in these criminal petitions, filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 read with Section 401. By this impugned order the learned Judge has framed charges against accused Shri Ripun Bora under Section 120(B)/302 IPC and under Section 120(B)/302/34 against the two co- accused, namely Pulin Phukan and Kamal Nath. Being aggrieved with the order of framing of charges, two of the three accused persons, namely, Ripun Bora and Pulin Phukan have filed the aforesaid criminal petitions. Though the third accused Kamal Nath has appeared in the case as a respondent no separate criminal petition was filed by him, so as to challenge the impugned order. 2. Heard Mr. Niloy Dutta, learned senior counsel for the appellants, assisted by Mr. AM Bora, Mr. N Borah, Mr. D Gogoi, Mr. SR Boruah and Mr. S Shyam, learned ...
Md. Sunajul Ali Vs. Md. Safiqur UddIn and Another
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Jun-11-2013
Oral: 1. This Second Appeal has been preferred by the defendant against the concurrent findings of the learned courts below in regard to a suit praying for decree of Specific Performance of Contract. 2. Plaintiffs 1 and 2 are the husband and wife. They filed Title Suit No.39 of 1996 before the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division No.2 in Cachar at Silchar stating that despite having an agreement been inked by the defendant with plaintiffs on 12.2.93 for purchasing a plot of land measuring 4 Kathas 11 Lechas 8 Gondas from him for a total consideration amount of Rs.30,000/- and the defendant having first received an advance sum of Rs.10,000/- and thereafter a sum of Rs.17,3000/- on 20.5.1993 by issuing a money receipt, hence leaving a balance of Rs. 2,700/- the defendant is yet to execute the sale deed and, worse, playing 3 of the said sum, if for any reason the plaintiffs had been found to be not entitled a decree for specific performance of the contract. truant with them.Hence, the pla...
Pradip Dutta Vs. the Union of India, Represented by the Secretary to t ...
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Jun-11-2013
Judgment and Order, (Oral) A.K. Goswami, J. 1. Heard Mr. M A Sheikh, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. C Baruah, learned CGC, appearing for Respondent No.1, Mr. J Abedin, learned Counsel appearing for Respondent Nos. 2, 3, 5 and 6 and Mr. S Borthakur, learned counsel for Respondent No.4. 2. This writ petition is directed against the letter of intent issued by the Reliance Industries Ltd., for short, RIL on 27.03.2006 appointing the Respondent No. 4 as a dealer for its retail outlet at Dhakuakhana, Assam. A further prayer is made for a direction to Respondent Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5 and 6, to issue advertisement for settlement of a retail outlet at Dhakuakhana, if they decided to open one. 3. It is pleaded in the writ petition that Dhakuakhana, which is a most backward region of the State of Assam, has a large unemployed population and in order to give employment opportunity to the local population, it was incumbent upon the respondents to have issued a notice invitin...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »