Court : Guwahati
H. Baruah, J.1. Heard Mr. S.N. Meitei, learned Counsel for the appellant. Also heard Mr. Lallianzuala Sailo, learned Counsel for the respondent No. 1. None appears for the respondent No. 2.2. This present appeal has been preferred by the Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., Zarkawt Aizawl against the judgment and award dated 2.2.05, passed in MACT Case No. 74/03 by the Ld. Member, MACT, Aizawl Under Section 173of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988. By this appeal, the appellant Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. seeks for setting aside and/or modification of the final award and order dated 2.2.05.3. Respondent No. 1 Smt. Thanmawii is the claimant in MACT Case No. 74/03 and she is the mother of the deceased Lalbiaktluanga aged about 46 years. Respondent No. 2 herein is the registered owner of the offending vehicle bearing registration No. AMZ-2459 (Tata 1210). On 28.4.03 deceased Lalbiaktluanga, while was travelling in the offending vehicle met with an accident at about 8.00 A. M. near Hunthar Veng Aizawl a...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Guwahati
Hrishikesh Roy, J.1. Heard Mr. T.C. Khatri, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. B. Goyal, learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents.2. This petition styled as a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) has been filed to challenge the requirement of production of 'No Objection Certificate' from Deputy Commissioner/Sub-Divisional Officers and from the Development Authorities under the Town and Country Planning Act, before the registering authority as a pre-condition for registration of documents such as sale deeds, required to be registered under the provisions of the Registration Act, 1908, hereinafter referred to as the 'Registration Act'. It is contended that in so far as registration of documents are concerned, the same are to be dealt with under the provisions of the Registration Act and once the requirement of Registration Act are fulfilled, there could be no objection to registration of registerable documents on the ground of non-availabili...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Guwahati
B.K. Sharma, J.1. The challenge made in this writ petition is the judgment and order passed by the authority under Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 and the appellate order thereof passed by the Appellate Authority.2. The facts leading to filing of the instant writ petition are that the respondent No. 3, retired Deputy Editor of the newspaper called 'Assam Tribune' represented by the petitioner management, after retirement from service in 1997 and after receipt of the gratuity amounting to Rs. 1,69,181/- submitted representation dated September 11, 1997 claiming gratuity following the norms of 26 days average month under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972. The amount claimed was for Rs. 2,23,128.17.3. When the aforesaid claim of the respondent No. 3 was not accepted by the petitioner management, he made a further representation to the Controlling Authority-cum-senior Assistant Labour Commissioner praying for recovery of the balance amount of gratuity payable to him. It was claimed that hi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Guwahati
B.K. Sharma, J.1. By means of this writ petition filed in 2004, the petitioners have made a challenge to the order dated 9.7.1998 passed in O.A. No. 13/1997 by the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Guwahati (hereinafter referred, to as 'the Tribunal').2. According to the petitioners, the impugned order dated 9.7.1998 has been passed ex-parte. While the petitioner No. 2 is a Company registered under the Indian Companies Act, 1956, the petitioner No. 1 is one of its Directors. They are aggrieved by the proceeding in O.A. No. 13/1997 initiated and completed by the Tribunal by the impugned order dated 9.7.1998.3. The occasion for the petitioners to file the instant writ petition on 3.2.2004 arose when the petitioners came to know about the legal notice published in the issue of the newspaper called 'Daily Telegraph' dated 18.11.2003. The specific averment made in Para-5 of the writ petition is that with the publication of the notice, the petitioners came to know that a debt recovery proceeding was...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Guwahati
I.A. Ansari, J.1. By this Civil Revision Petition, the plaintiffs, as landlords, have put to challenge the judgment and decree, dated 28.07.2000, passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), No. 1, Kamrup, in Title Appeal No. 38/99, allowing the appeal and reversing thereby the judgment and decree, dated 26.03.99, passed, in Title Suit No. 17/87, whereby the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), No. 1, Kamrup, had decreed the suit on the ground that the defendants were defaulter in making payment of the rent.2. The material facts and various stages, which have led to the present revision, may, in brief, be set out as follows:(i) The plaintiffs instituted Title Suit No. 17/87 aforementioned, their case being, in brief, thus: the suit premises, originally, belonged to one Radha Mohan Goenka under whom late Hridayananda Bora, predecessor-in-interest of the defendants, was a tenant at a monthly rental of Rs. 175/-, the rent being payable by the first week of each succeeding month...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Guwahati
Aftab H. Saikia, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the appellant including learned PP, Assam.2. This criminal appeal has been directed against the judgment and order dated 31.3.05 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Dhemaji in Sessions Case No. 8(DH)/04 convicting the appellant under Sections 304-B/498 A IPC and sentencing him accordingly to suffer R.I. for 3 (three) years and to a fine of Rs. 5,000/- in default further RI for 3 (three) months under Section 498-A IPC and to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs. 10,000/-in default R.I. for 1 (one) year under Section 304-B IPC.3. Prosecution case in brief is that the victim-Krishna Paul was given marriage to the accused-Robindra Paul/appellant in the year 1997. The married life between the accused and the victim was not at all peaceful. It was alleged that the accused started demanding dowry from the victim, particularly gold ornaments. The victim was accordingly physically assaulted by the accused. After about 6/7 months o...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Guwahati
B.P. Katakey, J.1. The State Legislature of Assam, on obtaining previous Presidential sanction under proviso to Article 304(b) of the Constitution, enacted the Assam Entry Tax Act, 2001 (Assam Act 4 of 2001)(in short, 'the principal Act') with a view to levy tax on entry of goods, into any local area of Assam for consumption, use or sale therein, which came into force on October 1, 2001, on publication of a notification dated September 28, 2001 in the Assam Gazette (Extraordinary) specifying the said date, in terms of the provisions contained in Section 1(3) of the said Act. Clause (b) of Section 2(1) defines 'entry of goods into a local area' as entry of goods as specified in the schedule into a local area from any place outside the State for consumption, use or sale therein. Section 2(1)(d) defines 'importer' as a person who brings specified goods into the local area from any place outside the State for consumption, use or sale including for consumption or use of such goods in works...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Guwahati
Jasti Chelameswar, C.J.1. Challenging the order dated 16.07.2007 passed by the Munsiff No. 1. Kamrup, Guwanati the present writ petition is filed. By the said order the learned Munsiff directed that warrant of arrest be issued against the petitioner,' who is a police officer in charge of Hatigaon Outpost.2. The facts leading to the issuance of warrant are as follows:The impugned order was passed by the learned Munsiff in Title Execution Case No. 16/2004 on 16.07.2007. Though the material on record is not very clear, we are informed at the Bar that the petitioners in the above petition are the decree holders, who obtained a decree for delivery of possession of an immovable property. For execution of the said decree it appears that they moved the petition numbered T. Ex. Case No. 16/04. It appears from the order dated 29.06.2007 that the executing court passed an order directing delivery of the decree schedule property to the decree holders and also directed that appropriate assistance ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Guwahati
D. Biswas, J.1. These appeals under Section 260A of the IT Act, 1961, are directed against the order dt. 17th Sept., 2003, passed by the Tribunal, Gauhati Bench, Gauhati in ITA Nos. 49/Gau/2001 and 33/Gau/2001 relevant to the asst. yrs. 1996-97 and 1997-98. The appeals were admitted by this Court by the order dt. 10th Sept., 2004, for hearing on the following questions of law:In IT Appeal No. 52 of 2004:(a) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and on interpretation of the provisions of Sub-section (2A) of Section 10 of the Act, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the income received by the assessee is not exempt under Section 10(2A) of the Act ?(b) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, can it be said that the income received from the parent firm by the appellant sub-partnership does not possess the same character of share of income and, therefore, is not entitled to the exemption ?(c) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Guwahati
1. Is the transfer of the right to use any goods for any purpose (whether or not for a specified period) for cash, deferred payment or other valuable consideration, subject to levy of sales tax under the Tripura Sales Tax Act, 1976 (in short, 'the TST Act') and if so, who is liable to pay such a tax, are two important questions raised in this series of appeals.2. Yet another question, raised in the present set of appeals, is as to whether Sub-rule (2) of Rule 3A of the Tripura Sales Tax Rules, 1976 (in short, 'the TST Rules'), can be treated to be a valid piece of delegated legislation, when it mandates every person, responsible for making payment to the transferor of the right to use any goods for any purpose (whether or not for a specified period), to deduct an amount equal to four percentum of the dues of such a transferor towards part or full satisfaction of the sales tax payable, under the TST Act, on account of such transfer of the right.3. Before we make endeavour to answer the...
Tag this Judgment!