Guwahati Court March 2016 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.
Boby Gogoi @ Lohit Vs. The State of Assam
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Mar-04-2016
Judgment and Order [Cav] R.K. Phukan, J. 1. Heard Ms. D. Borgohain, learned Amicus Curiae for the appellant and also Mr. K.A. Mazumdar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam for the respondent. 2. This present appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 3.9.2012 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Golaghat in Sessions Case No. 118/2008 whereby the accused/appellant has been convicted under Section 302 IPC and sentenced him SI for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 5000/- and in default of fine, SI for one year. 3. The prosecution story in brief is that on 2.5.2008 at around 8 PM, the accused appellant inflicted cut injury on the neck of the his elder brother Krishna Gogoi by means of sharp weapon and as a result, Krishna Gogoi succumbed to his injuries on the way to hospital. One Sri Narayan Bora/brother-in-law of the deceased lodged an FIR before the O/C Merapani P.S. on the next day of occurrence. Accordingly, Merapani P.S. Case No. 47/2008 was registered under Section...
Md. Amir Uddin Laskar and Another Vs. Md. Abul Hussain Laskar
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Mar-03-2016
1. Two second appeals based on common facts are listed together and are analogously heard. Except for two separate plots under same dag and patta of same mouza, all other facts are same. Even one set of residence was let by the plaintiff for his two identical suits while defendant has no evidence at all to rely in either case. Decision in one second appeal, therefore, would cover the other second appeal. RSA No. 22/2006 is argued by the learned counsel for both sides as lead case. It is accordingly decided. 2. In this second appeal, the defendant has challenged the judgment of reversal passed by the learned First Appellate Court in Title Appeal No. 32/2004. The learned Trial Court dismissed the suit against which the plaintiff preferred title appeal and the same was allowed by the impugned judgment and decree. Aggrieved, the defendant has preferred this appeal. Admitting the second appeal on 07.04.2006, this Court framed the following substantial question of law:- Whether the learned A...
Niranjan Hazarika Vs. The State of Assam
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Mar-02-2016
Judgment and Order [Cav] 1. Heard Mr. P. Bora, learned counsel for the appellant and also Mr. B. J. Dutta, learned counsel for the respondent. 2. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 20.8.2005 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Sivasagar in Criminal Appeal Case No. 2(1)/2004 dismissing the appeal upholding the judgment and order dated 30.12.2003, passed by the learned SDJM, Charaideo, Sonari in G.R. Case No. 405/1994 convicting the petitioner U/S 392 IPC and sentencing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and fine of Rs. 3000/- in default, furher rigorous imprisonment for another three months. 3. The prosecution story in brief is that one Khagendra Prasad Bharali, the Manager of Bortiman Tea Estate lodged an written ejahar, stating interalia that on 20.8.1994, at about 11.45 AM while there employee W.B. Swear, Deputy Manager of the garden, and other employee Shri Bulbul Shyam and Deep Singh after taking garden remittance of Rs. 2,31,000/- keeping...
The State of Assam, Represented by the Principal Secretary to the Gove ...
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Mar-02-2016
Judgment and Order (Cav) Manojit Bhuyan, J. 1. Heard Mr. BJ Ghosh, learned counsel representing the petitioner. Also heard Mr. MK Choudhury, learned Senior counsel, assisted by Mr. HK Das, Advocate, representing the respondent. 2. The legality and validity of the order dated 14.12.2012 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Guwahati Bench (hereinafter alluded to as the Tribunal ) in OA 351/2012 is put to challenge by the State of Assam. 3. The sole respondent Sri Mamat Kalita is from the batch of officers of the 1978-80 State Forest Service (Assam). The issue primarily revolves round promotion with regard to the members of the State Forest Service to the Assam segment of IFS Joint Cadre of Assam-Meghalaya. OA 351/2013 was instituted by the respondent challenging the Order dated 26.6.2012 of the Principal Secretary to the Government of Assam, Environment and Forest Department declining request for review of the ACRs for the period 24.11.1999 to 31.3.2001. 4. Facts necessary to t...
M/s. Assam Silicate, Glass and Chemical Works, Having its Head Office ...
Court: Guwahati
Decided on: Mar-01-2016
Judgment and Order (Oral) Hrishikesh Roy, J. 1. Heard Mr. JC Gaur, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. S. Saikia, the learned standing counsel for the Finance (Taxation) Department, appearing for the respondent Nos.1 4. But none appears for the M/s. Nilachal Chemical (P) Ltd. (respondent No.5), who were impleaded on 7.1.2015. 2. The petitioner produces Sodium Silicate which is used as an ingredient in manufacture of soap, detergent, cement and other such products. They claim that Sodium Silicate should be subjected to tax @4% under the Assam Value Added Tax Act, 2003 (hereinafter referred to as the the VAT Act ), by treating it as industrial input under Part- C of IInd Schedule of the VAT Act. With such contention, the petitioner challenges the order dated 5.1.2006 (Annexure-C), whereby the Commissioner of Taxes, on the application of the Nilachal Chemical (P) Ltd. (respondent No.5) noted that Sodium Silicate is an unspecified item, which is not covered by ...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›