Guwahati Court June 2015 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.
Jaya Handique and Others Vs. Bimala Dutta
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Jun-26-2015
Judgment and Order (Oral) 1. Heard Mr. B.D. Goswami, learned counsel for the appellants. Also heard Mr. A.C. Sarma, learned counsel for the respondent. 2. This appeal is preferred by the successors of the original defendant against the judgment and decree dated 13.11.2003 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Sr. Divn.) No.2, Guwahati in Title Appeal No.40/2002 dismissing the appeal and affirming the judgment and decree dated 30.04.2002 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Jr. Divn.) No.1, Guwahati in Title Suit No.101/1995. 3. The second appeal was admitted to be heard by an order dated 06.04.2004 on the following substantial questions of law: 1. Whether power of attorney-holder can depose in the case on behalf of the Principal in the absence of any infirmity of the Principal in view of Section 2 of the Power of Attorney Act and Order XXXII Rule15 CPC? 2. Whether in a suit decree of eviction can be passed in absence of proof of right, title over the suit land ? 3. Whether a Court can allow...
Union of India, Represented by the Deputy Director of S.I.B. Vs. Surjy ...
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Jun-26-2015
1. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 30.05.2012 rendered by learned Civil Judge, Sonitpur, Tezpur in T.A. No. 3 of 2011 dismissing the appeal questioning the judgment and decree dated 15.03.2011 rendered by Munsiff No. 1, Sonitpur, Tezpur, in T.S. No. 5 of 2004 decreeing the suit of the plaintiffs. 2. Heard Mr. J. Deka, learned C.G.C. for the appellant. Also heard Mr. K. Bhatta, learned Senior Ccounsel assisted by Mr. D.C. K. Hazarika for the respondents. 3. The facts necessary for disposal of the present appeal, in brief, are that the respondent No. 2 and 3 herein (who would be referred to as plaintiff Nos. 1 and 2 respectively), filed Title Suit No. 5 of 2004 against the appellant herein (who would be referred to as the defendant) seeking a decree for permanent and perpetual injunction restraining and prohibiting the defendant therein and its officers and employees from raising any construction on the land, more particularly described in the Schedule B and C of the p...
Union of India, represented by the General Manager, N.F. Railways Vs. ...
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Jun-25-2015
Judgment and Order (CAV) 1. Heard learned Standing Counsel, Railways appearing for the appellant. Also heard Mr. A. Goyal, learned counsel for the Respondents. 2. This is an appeal under Section 23 of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 against the judgment and order dated 01.07.2011 passed by the learned Railway Claims Tribunal, Guwahati Bench, Guwahati in Application No.106 of 2008. 3. The brief facts of the case, is that the respondent No.1 as applicant filed the Original Application No.106 of 2008 before the learned Railway Claims Tribunal, Guwahati claiming refund of Rs.29,168/- for freight overcharges with cost and interest due to imposition of terminal charge at an enhanced rate. The Respondent No.1/applicant booked a train load of 73640 bags of dry fly ash on 19.12.2007 under Invoice No.1/RR No.147980 from NTKS/CLG under Eastern Railways, Kolkata to CGS (Changsari) under North Eastern Frontier Railways. The case of the Respondent No.1 was that at the Booking Station Terminal ...
Subir Dhar Vs. The State of Assam
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Jun-25-2015
Judgment and Order (CAV) 1. This is an appeal filed under Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for setting aside the judgment and order dated 31.5.2006 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge (Ad-hoc), Hojai at Sankardev Nagar, Nagaon, Assam (Fast Track Court) in Sessions Case No.208(N)05 thereby convicting the appellant under Section 417 IPC and sentencing him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for three months and to pay a fine of Rs.20000/- in default to suffer simple imprisonment for 60 days. 2. The brief facts of the case as projected in the FIR filed by the informant Smti Bhanuprabha Hazarika is that the accused Shri Subir Dhar was in love with her daughter Smt. Barnali Hazarika for the last five years prior to the filing of the FIR. When the complainant asked the accused about the love affairs, the later told her that he will marry her daughter. But on 24.10.04, the accused refused to marry the complainant s daughter as a result of which her daughter Smti Barnali Hazari...
Chotu Devi Yadab Vs. Jamuna Prasad Koiri
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Jun-23-2015
1. Heard Mr. B. Ullah, learned counsel appearing for the appellants/ defendant. Also heard Mr. S.P. Choudhury, learned counsel representing the respondents. 2. This second appeal has been filed against the concurrent judgment and decree dated 15-12-2006 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Sr. Div.), Dibrugarh in Title Appeal No. 16/2004 dismissing the appeal of the appellant/ defendant and affirming the judgment and decree dated 21-09-2004 passed by the Civil Judge (Jr. Div.) No. 1, Dibrugarh in Title Suit No. 84/2000. 3. The fact of the case, as projected in the plaint in brief is that originally Ram Janam Koiri, Dhoritri Koiri and the plaintiff himself were the joint owners and co-pattadars in respect of a plot of land measuring 1B-1K-3L covered by Dag No. 137 of PP No. 278 of Dibrugarh Town mouza, Chiring Gaon ward in the district of Dibrugarh. After the death of Ram Janam Koiri and Dhoritri Koiri, the plaintiff Jamuna Prasad Koiri had become the owner of the suit land on the basis o...
Andheri Musalmani and Others Vs. Sarifat Ali and Another
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Jun-22-2015
1. Heard Mr. M.H. Choudhury, learned counsel for the appellants. Also heard Mr. A. Barkataky, learned counsel for the respondents. 2. This is an appeal by the defendants against the judgment and decree dated 14.01.2004, passed by the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Morigaon, in Title Appeal No. 25/03, setting aside the judgment and decree dated 08.08.2003, passed by the learned Civil Judge, Junior Division No. 2, in Title Suit No. 16/99. 3. The original plaintiff died during the pendency of the suit and the present respondents are her sons, Momin Ali and Islam Uddin through her two husbands. 4. The appeal was admitted to be heard by an order dated 11.05.2004 on the following substantial question of law: Whether the registered Relinquishment Deed, executed in the year 1969 in favour of the appellant along with delivery of possession could be retracted from after expiry of more than 30 years claiming recovery of possession affecting the appellant by removing their residential premi...
Biswajit Bhattacharjee and Others Vs. Pranati Kana Das and Others
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Jun-19-2015
1. Heard Mr. B.R. Dey, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners (Judgment-Debtors). Also heard Mr. D. Mazumdar, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the respondents (Decree-Holders). 2. The Title Suit No.332/1992 was filed by Saroj Kumar Das (predecessor of the respondents) against Paresh Bhattacharjee (predecessor of the petitioners) for ejectment of the defendant from the shop house in Ward No.119 of Karimganj Municipality. The tenanted premises was described in the Schedule to the plaint and the plaintiff claimed that the tenant failed to pay the rent from the month of Baishak, 1398 B.S. After receiving summons from the Court, the defendant filed his Written Statement (W.S.) and denied that he is a tenant under the plaintiff. On the contrary the defendant claimed to be the owner of the suit house on the basis of purchase made from the successors of Surajit Das, vide Sale Deed dated 15.12.1992 (Exbt.A). 3. The learned Civil Judge (Jr. Division) No.1, Karimganj obs...
Sukumar Namasudra and Another Vs. Bhojan Namasudra and Others
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Jun-19-2015
1. Heard Ms. R. Choudhury, learned counsel for the appellants/defendants. Also heard Mr. N. Dhar, learned counsel appearing for the respondents/plaintiffs. 2. This appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 30.4.2004 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Karimganj in Title Appeal No. 47/2002 allowing the appeal by setting aside the judgment and decree dated 13.5.2002 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Karimganj in Title Suit No. 74/1993 decreeing the suit. 3. The case of the plaintiff as projected in the plaint, in short, is that Abalabala Namasudra, wife of Piariram Namusudra sold 1st schedule and 3rd schedule lands to the father of plaintiff Nos. 1, 2 and 3 and husband of plaintiff No. 4, namely, Pulin Namasudra by registered sale deed dated 31.1.1973, which was exhibited as Ext. 3. It is pleaded that in the northern part of the land, Pulin Namasudra excavated a tank. 1st schedule land refers to 1 kedar of land, equivalent to .30 decimal...
Jyotish Deka and Others Vs. On the death of Gajendra Deka, his legal h ...
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Jun-18-2015
1. Heard Mr. D. Choudhury, learned counsel for the appellants. Also heard Mr. B. Banerjee, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. S.K. Mukhtar, learned counsel for the respondents. 2. This appeal is by the plaintiffs against the judgment and decree dated 20.01.2005 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Sr. Divn.), Nalbari in Title Appeal No.17/2004 allowing the appeal of the defendant and reversing the judgment and decree dated 28.06.2004 in Title Suit No.22/01 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Jr. Divn.) No.1, Nalbari, whereby suit of the plaintiffs was partly decreed without cost. 3. The case set out by the plaintiffs is that father of the plaintiffs, namely, Rajendra Deka and Gajia @ Gaji were brothers. Gaji was untraced for 30/35 years and as such the plaintiffs father was possessing the entire land in K.P. No.189 of Village- Narayanpur. There is 2 Bigha 9 Lecha, 1 Bigha 4 Katha and 1 Bigha 2 Katha 11 Lecha, in Dag Nos.62, 76 and 94 of K.P. No.189, respectively, totaling 5 Bigha 2 Ka...
Ramen Bora Vs. Brajen Bora
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Jun-17-2015
1. Heard Mr. H.K. Baishya, learned counsel for the appellant. Also heard Mr. B. Banerjee, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. K. Bhattacharjee for the respondents. 2. This appeal is preferred by the defendant against the judgment and decree dated 11.12.2003 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Jorhat in Title Appeal No.37/2002 dismissing the appeal preferred against the judgment and decree dated 27.09.2002 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Jr. Divn.) No.2, Jorhat in Title Suit No.1/2001, decreeing the suit of the plaintiff. 3. This appeal was admitted to be heard by an order passed on 20.05.2004 on the following substantial questions of law:- 1. Whether the appeal is admitted under Section 58 of the Indian Evidence Act? 2. Whether the learned lower Court was right in following Section 23 and Section 11 and 12 of the Contract Act ? 3. Whether a decree passed by the learned Court below is right under Section 31(1) of the Specific Relief Act when the plaintiff did not exhi...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »