Guwahati Court May 2014 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.
Rahmat Ali, Assam and Others Vs. The State of Assam
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: May-22-2014
(Oral) (Katakey, J). 1. These appeals are directed against the judgment, dated 10-02-2011, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (FTC), Cachar at Silchar, in Sessions Case No. 118 of 2009, convicting Rahmat Ali and Hiramoni Mazumdar, appellants in Criminal Appeal No. 60 of 2011, under Section 323/34 and 324/34 IPC and Page 2 of 14 Criminal Appeal Nos. 60/11 and 62/11 sentencing them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 2 (two) years each and to pay fine of Rs. 2,000/- each, in default of payment of fine, to suffer rigorous imprisonment for a further period of 2 (two) months each, for the offence punishable under Section 324/34 IPC; and to undergo simple imprisonment for 3 (three) months each and pay fine of Rs. 500/- each, in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for further period of 15 days, for their offence, punishable under Section 323/34 IPC, and also convicting Moni Mia Mazumdar, appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 62 of 2011, under Section 302 IPC and sentencing him to...
Md. Anowar Ali and Others Vs. The State of Assam and Others
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: May-22-2014
A.K. Goswami, J. 1. Heard Mr. A. K. Purkayastha, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. A.C. Buragohain, learned Additional Advocate General, Assam, appearing for the respondent Nos.1 and 3 as well as Mr. M. Bhagawati, learned Central Government Counsel, appearing for the respondent No.2. 2. The writ petition has been placed before the Full Bench consequent upon an order passed by the Honble the Chief Justice following an order dated 5.3.2013 passed by a learned single Judge of this court. The question which requires answer by the Full Bench is: Whether the orders passed by the IMDT ceased to exist after declaration of Illegal Migrants (Determination by Tribunals) Act, 1983 as unconstitutional by the Apex Court in Sarbananda Sonowal v. Union of India, reported in AIR 2005 SC 2920. In other words, whether such proceedings, which had already been decided by the IMDT prior to such declaration, have to be decided by the Foreigners Tribunal afresh? 3. At the outset, it will be r...
Khargeswar Chetia, Lakhimpur Vs. The State of Assam, Represented by th ...
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: May-21-2014
(Oral). 1. All the writ petitions have been heard analogously and are being disposed of by this common judgment and order. 2. WP(C) NO.854/2012:- The challenge in this writ petition is the Annexure-C letter dated 28.12.2011 by which the DEEO, Lakhimpur directed the president Goroimari M.E School to release the petitioner from the school in which he was shown to have been working as an Assistant Teacher. The fact of the matter is that although the petitioner was appointed in the school (Venture stage) way back in 1986, but he was elected as Ward Member of Ghatapathar GMPC under No.71 Uttar Dhakuakhana Gaon Panchayat in the year 2008. After remaining in the office of the Ward Member for three years, the petitioner resigned from the Ward Membership by submitting resignation letter and he was released as Ward Member and thereafter rejoined his duty as an Assistant Teacher of the school. However, in view of the impugned letter referred to above, when he was sought to be debarred from attend...
Nanibala Dutta and Others Vs. Rupama Dutta and Others
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: May-20-2014
1. This is a second appeal filed by the plaintiffs under Section 100 of C.P.Code against the judgment/decree dated 24.1.2005 passed by Civil Judge (Senior Division), Jorhat in Title Appeal No.24 of 2003 which in turn arise out of judgment/decree dated 4.8.2003 passed by Civil Judge (Junior Division) No.1, Jorhat in Title Suit No.95 of 1993. By impugned judgment/decree, both the courts below dismissed the appellants (plaintiffs) suit for declaration of their title and share in the suit land, for confirmation of their possession over the suit land, and for injunction restraining the respondents (defendants) from disposing of the suit land in relation to the suit land etc. So the question which arise for consideration in this appeal is whether two courts below were justified in dismissing appellants suit and thereby were justified in not granting them any relief which they had claimed in the suit against the respondents (defendants) in relation to the suit land. This second appeal was adm...
Suparna Sen (Chanda) and Another Vs. Ashit Chanda
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: May-20-2014
(Oral). 1. Heard Mr. PK Talukdar, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. AK Talukdar, learned counsel appearing for the opposite party. 2. This application under Section 401 read with Section 397 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, for short, Cr.PC, and Article 227 of the Constitution of India is directed against the judgment and order dated 19.06.2012 passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Cachar, Silchar, in FC (Crl.) Case No. 8/2010, whereby the learned Principal Judge had passed an award of Rs. 1,500/- to the wife, i.e., petitioner No. 1, and Rs. 1000/- for her school going minor son, i.e., petitioner No. 2, as maintenance under Section 125 Cr.PC from the date of the order. 3. The petitioner No. 1 was married to the opposite party following hindu rites and rituals on 28.02.2002 and out of their wedlock, a male child was born to them on 15.03.2003. Alleging that subsequent to the birth of the child, the opposite party started torturing the petitioner ...
Abdul Matin Alias Abdul Matlib, Assam Vs. Samir Uddin and Others
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: May-20-2014
This is a second appeal filed by the plaintiff under Section 100 of C. P. Code against the judgment/decree dated 10.9.2002 passed by Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Nagaon in Title Appeal No.25 of 2001 which in turn arise out of judgment/decree dated 20.6.1991 passed by Civil Judge (Jr. Division), Nagaon in Title Suit No.61 of 1993. By impugned judgment, the two courts below dismissed the appellants suit for declaration, confirmation of his possession or in the alternative for possession of the suit land and for injunction in relation to the suit land against the defendant. This appeal was admitted for final hearing on following substantial question of law. The Matriculation Certificate (Ext.4) having been proved by the plaintiff, whether the learned courts below were justified in rejecting the age mentioned in the Matriculation Certificate (Ext.4), in disregard to Section 64 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 read with Section 3 of the Indian Majority Act, 1875, on the basis of oral evidenc...
Md. Amir Ali and Others Vs. The State of Assam and Another
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: May-20-2014
Katakey, J. 1. These appeals are directed against the judgment and order dated 12.07.2010 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge (FTC), Barpeta, in Sessions Case No.20/2007, convicting the appellants in Crl.A. No.161/2010 under Section 302/34 IPC and sentencing them to under rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/-, in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for a further period of 3(three) months, as well as under Section 323/34 IPC and sentencing them to undergo simple imprisonment for 3(three) months, by acquitting Sri Crl.A. 161/2010, 139/2014 Akbar Ali, respondent No.1 in Crl.A. No.139/2014 (earlier registered as Crl.Rev.P. No.266/2011) from the charges framed under Section 302/323/34 IPC. Crl.A. No.161/2010 has been filed by the appellants Amir Ali, Siddique Ali and Golap Hussain, who were convicted under Section 302/34 IPC and 323/34 IPC, challenging the aforesaid judgment of conviction passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge (FTC), Barpeta. Crl.A. No...
The State of Assam Represented by the Revenue Secretary, Guwahati and ...
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: May-20-2014
1. The decision rendered in this second appeal shall also govern the disposal of connected second appeal being RSA No. 235 of 2005, because both the appeals involve common issues of facts and law. This is a second appeal filed by the defendant (State) under Section 100 of C.P.Code against the judgment/decree dated 12.8.2005 passed by Civil Judge (Sr. Division) No.3 at Guwahati in Title Appeal No.48/93 which in turn arise out of judgment/decree dated 22.7.1993 passed by Munsiff No.3, Guwahati in Title Suit no.294 of 1992. By impugned judgment/decree, the first appellate court dismissed the defendants appeal and in consequence affirmed the judgment/decree of the trial court, which had decreed the respondents suit. So the question which arises for consideration in this appeal is whether two courts below were justified in decreeing plaintiffs (respondents) suit against the defendant (appellant herein) in relation to the suit land. This second appeal was admitted for final hearing on follow...
Abdul Matin Alias Abdul Matlib, Assam Vs. Samir Uddin and Others
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: May-20-2014
This is a second appeal filed by the plaintiff under Section 100 of C. P. Code against the judgment/decree dated 10.9.2002 passed by Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Nagaon in Title Appeal No.25 of 2001 which in turn arise out of judgment/decree dated 20.6.1991 passed by Civil Judge (Jr. Division), Nagaon in Title Suit No.61 of 1993. By impugned judgment, the two courts below dismissed the appellants suit for declaration, confirmation of his possession or in the alternative for possession of the suit land and for injunction in relation to the suit land against the defendant. This appeal was admitted for final hearing on following substantial question of law. The Matriculation Certificate (Ext.4) having been proved by the plaintiff, whether the learned courts below were justified in rejecting the age mentioned in the Matriculation Certificate (Ext.4), in disregard to Section 64 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 read with Section 3 of the Indian Majority Act, 1875, on the basis of oral evidenc...
M/s. K.M. Sarmah Electricals Rep. by Its Proprietor, Guwahati and Othe ...
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: May-20-2014
(Oral). 1. Heard Mr. BD Das, the learned Sr. counsel representing the petitioners in the WP(C) Nos.4107/2011, 726/2008 and 5767/2010 respectively. Advocates Mr. PJ Saikia and Mr. M. Choudhury are appearing for the other petitioners in this group. The Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. (IOC) is represented by the Sr. Counsel Mr. SN Sarma in the WP(C) No.3523/2012. In the other cases, the IOC is represented by Mr. N. Deka, the learned Counsel. The Employees Provident Funds Organization (EPF) and their authorities are represented by their Standing Counsel, Mr. PK Roy. As agreed to by the parties the cases are heard analogously and this judgment will cover all the cases. 2. These cases pertain to minor contract works under the IOC and the primary grievance of the petitioners is the tender requirement of furnishing the Provident Fund Code (hereinafter referred to as the PF Code) in order to be eligible for submitting tenders under the IOC. The petitioners contend that they are small time contracto...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »