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.
Md. Zakir Ali Khan and Others Vs. Md. Maskandar Ali and Others
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: May-07-2014
(Oral). 1. By this second appeal the defendant has challenged appellate judgment and decree dated 27.03.2002 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Sr. Divn.) No.1, Silchar, in T.A. 05/2001, reversing the judgment of the learned Trial Court and decreeing the suit of the plaintiff for specific performance of contract. 2. The respondent, as plaintiff, instituted title suit being No. 50/1993 in the court of learned Sadar Munsiff No.1, Cachar, Silchar stating that the predecessor of the defendants Late Siddique Ali Khan during his life time entered into a contract with the plaintiff on 29.06.1988 for sale of the suit land at a consideration amount of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) and received a sum of Rs. 8,000/- (Rupees eight thousand) from the plaintiff. The said deed was duly registered. It was stipulated in the deed for agreement for sale that upon receipt of the rest amount of Rs. 2,000/- (Rupees two thousand) within 23 (twenty three) months from the date of execution thereof necessar...
Md. Haren Ahmed and Others Vs. The State of Assam and Others
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: May-06-2014
1. Heard Mr. B. D. Konwar, the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners in the WP(C) No. 1023/2009. The petitioner in the WP(C) 4478/2007 is represented by advocate Mr. S.C. Biswas. M/s. Priya Travels (respondent No.8) is represented by Mr. B. Talukdar, the learned Counsel. The learned Government Advocate Mr. J. Handique appears for the other official respondents while the Commissioner of Transport is represented by the Standing Counsel for the Transport department. 2. The matter pertains to the traffic congestion and inconvenience caused by parking of buses by the respondent M/s. Priya Travels and the petitioners contend that the private respondent is illegally operating their bus stand in the heart of the Daboka town without any trade licence or legal authority. 3. On 30.9.1991, the SDO, Hojai with the consent of the land owners allowed M/s. Priya Travels to utilise 2 Katha 10 Lechas of land on the Daboka-Diphu Road. But it was specified that the buses should not be parked outsi...
Sarukan Deka Raja, Assam Vs. Tihadoi Lalungoni @ Patar and Others
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: May-06-2014
(Oral). 1. By filing this second appeal defendant has challenged the concurrent findings of the learned court below whereby plaintiffs suit was partly decreed to the extent of 1 Bigha 4 Lechas under PP No. 63 and Dag No. 127 of Batadrawa Mouza in the district of Nagaon. This 1 Bigha 4 Lechas of land constituted one-fourth of the suit land measuring 4 Bighas 17 Lechas of the aforesaid Dag and Patta. 2. Tihadoi Lalungoni, as plaintiff, instituted Title Suit No. 83/1998 in the court of learned Civil Judge (Jr. Divn.) No.2, Nagaon stating that land measuring 4 Bighas 17 Lechas covered by Dag No. 127 of PP No. 63 under Batadrawa Mouza in the district of Nagaon was originally owned by one Badak Lalung, her grandfather. The land was covered by K.P. No. 56 and Dag No. 208 at that time but during settlement operation in the year 1968-69 the land was resurveyed into K.P. No. 14 and Dag No. 204. In the mean time Badak Lalung had died and his only son Kalia Lalung had inherited the whole plot of 4...
Saleh Ahmed, Assam Vs. The State of Assam
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: May-06-2014
(Oral) Katakey, J. 1. This appeal, by the convict, is directed against the judgment of conviction dated 06.10.2010 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Sonitpur at Tezpur, in Sessions Case No.166/2005, convicting the appellant under Section 302 IPC and sentencing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/-, in default, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a further period of 2(two) months. 2. A criminal investigation was set in motion based on an FIR lodged on 25.01.2005, on the basis of which Jamuguri P.S. Case No.10/2005 under Section 341/302/109/34 IPC was registered. The prosecution story is that Md. Jalaluddin (PW-3) on 25.01.2005 has lodged an FIR alleging that on that date at about 10 A.M. while his elder brother Jainal Sheikh (the deceased) along with his daughter Jyotshnara Khatun @ Begum (PW-4) and son Md. Ismail Hussain (PW-2), aged about 12 years and 8 years, respectively, was carrying stone chips in the gunny begs on his bicycle from the ...
Dubraj Hemron, Resident of Holotup Gaon, Mouza Hapjan, Assam and Anoth ...
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: May-06-2014
The decision rendered in this second appeal shall also govern the disposal of other connected Second Appeal being SA No. 117 of 2006 because firstly, both these appeals arise between the same parties, secondly: both relates to same suit property (land), thirdly: it is based on more or less same cause of action and lastly: this court has directed tagging of the aforementioned two appeals for their disposal analogously. This is a second appeal filed by the defendant under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure against the judgment dated 16.11.2002 and Decree dated 14.1.2003 passed by Ad-hoc Additional District Judge No.1, Tinsukia which in turn arise out of judgment/decree dated 6.9.2001 passed by Civil Judge (Sr. Division) No.1, Tinsukia in Title Suit No.29 of 1994. By impugned judgment/decree, the first appellate court dismissed the defendants first appeal and in consequence confirmed the judgment/decree passed by the trial court which had decreed plaintiffs suit for declaration o...
Dipak Kumar Choudhury, Kamrup, Assam Vs. The State of Assam, Represent ...
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: May-06-2014
(Oral). 1. Heard Mr. K Sarma, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. The State respondents are represented by Mr. J Handique, the learned Govt. Advocate, while the respondent No.3 is represented by Dr. G Lal, Advocate. 2. The matter pertains to a mutation dispute and the petitioner challenges the judgment dated 20.8.2009 (Annexure-5) in Case No.R.A.(K)-11/2009, rendered by the Assam Board of Revenue (hereinafter referred to as the Revenue Board), whereby the Appeal filed by the respondent No.3 against the order of the Settlement Officer dated 31.12.2008, granting mutation to the petitioner was allowed and the impugned order of the Settlement Officer was quashed by the Revenue Board. 3. The original pattadar of the land measuring 5 Bighas 10 Lechas covered by Dag No.565 of Periodic Patta No.32 of village Hengrabari under Beltola Mouza was Late Hema Prabha Choudhury, wife of Late Rohini Kumar Choudhury. The petitioner bases his claim as the grandson of the original pattadar, throu...
Guwahati Municipal Corporation, Through Its Commissioner Vs. M/S. Inte ...
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: May-05-2014
Judgment and Order (CAV): 01. Issue raised in all the three writ petitions i.e., WP(C) Nos.2711/2012, 2789/2012 and 2790/2012 being identical, those were heard together and are being disposed of by this common order. 02. In all the three writ petitions, Guwahati Municipal Corporation (GMC) is the writ petitioner. In WP(C) 2711/2012, the contesting respondent i.e., respondent No. 1 is M/s. Industrial Construction Ltd, in WP(C) No. 2789/2012, it is M/s. SPM Engineers Ltd; whereas in WP(C) No.2790/2012, it is M/s. Zoom Industrial Services Ltd. All the three writ petitions seek quashing of arbitral awards dated 20.01.2004, passed by the respondent No. 2 as the Arbitrator as well as the proceedings in the money execution cases instituted by the claimants/respondent No. 1 in all the three cases for execution of the arbitral awards. The challenge has been made on the sole ground of the arbitral awards being vitiated by fraud and collusion. 03. For the sake of convenience, facts relating to WP...
Prasanta Kr. Deb and Others Vs. The State of Assam and Others
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: May-05-2014
A.M. Sapre, CJ. This is a writ petition filed by writ petitioners (15 in numbers) under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India seeking to invoke our extra ordinary jurisdiction in the field of Public Interest Litigation (PIL). According to the writ petitioners, they are the residents of Lakhipur District. Their main grievance in this writ petition is about the place for construction of one Recreation Centre Hall in the area. They say that the site selected by the authorities is neither suitable nor proper for construction of the Recreation Centre Hall and hence it should not be allowed to be constructed at the place chosen by the authorities but it should be at some other place which is of their liking. In other words, the question raised by them for our decision is which is the proper place for construction of Recreation Centre Hall whether at A place chosen by the state authorities or at B place which writ petitioner say to be more proper and suitable. We are afraid; we can en...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›