Court : Guwahati
Dr. T.N. Singh, J. 1. Environmental compulsions of the modern age are increasingly motivating governmental activities adding an edge to State's regulatory functions. Necessarily, matching measures have to be, and are. evolved to promote public good. Rapid strides in technological and scientific advancement with the growth of commerce and industry following in its wake carry inevitably their impress on regulatory laws. Measures conferring powers on public officials enabling them to discharge public duties under such laws pose jural problem of great variety and complexity. Balancing of conflicting individual interests apart, the dominant social and/or economic purposes underlying such measures obligate Courts in a constitutionally mandated welfare State like ours to extend their forensic insight beyond the pale of fact-situation of the lis. The interpretation of Section 31 of the Motor Vehicles Act 1939 (shortly, the Act) lies at the heart of the lis in the instant case raising an impo...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Guwahati
Ram Labhaya, J.1. The State of Assam has appealed from an order o Mr. B. R. Das, Magistrate 1st Class, Mangaldai, dated 25-8-1952 by which he acquitted Naramud-din Ahmed and Roisuddin Kabiraj rinding them nut guilty of offences with which they had been charged. Roisuddin has died. The appeal against him has abated. It is now directed against the acquittal of Narumuddin Ahmed alone.2. The proceeding was initiated on a complaint by Md. Foimuddin Gaobura. The complaint was Under Sections 342/161/381, IPC It embodies a very brief statement of the prosecution case. It discloses that the two accused Naramuddin and Roisuddm called him (complainant) from Tengani Hatkhoia oil 5-3-1951 tied his hands and kept him in confinement for about an hour in front of the shophouse belonging to one Dhuler Pathak. Roisuddin, accused, got Rs. 200/- m cash from his father Jaimuddin and released him.3. The complaint was put in on 7th May 1951, the occurrence was alleged to have taken place at 5-5-1951 which w...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Guwahati
J.N. Sharma, J. 1. C.R. No. 581/87. This application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed challenging the legality and validity of the impugned Trade Notice dated 1-4-1987 vide Annexure-C and communications dated 6-4-1987, 9-4-1987 and 23-4-1987 vide annexures D1, D2 and D3 respectively issued by the Assistant Collector of Customs and Central Excise, Dibrugarh and the communications dated 10-4-1987 and 24-4-1987 issued by the Superintendent of Customs and Central Excise, Naharkatia Range-III, Dibrugarh with a prayer for quashing the same.The Trade Notice No. 2/87 reads as follows :-'where the assessee sells their commodities at the factory gate as per Section 4(1)(a), as well as from sale depot as per Section 4(2) of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944, in wholesale and the unit billing price at these two points of sale is different, he shall likewise file one price list in Part-I for factory and gate sale and another price list in Part-II for selling Depot...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Guwahati
I.A. Ansari, J.1. What is statutory or legal presumption? How does the statutory presumption differ from natural presumption or presumption of fact? How statutory or legal presumption can be discharged by an accused? What is the standard of proof required, in a criminal trial, to discharge a legal or statutory presumption? Can statutory or legal presumption be taken to have been discharged by an accused probalises his defence by giving reasonable explanation as regards the evidence appearing against him? Whether prosecution of a drawer of a cheque, for dishonour of the cheque on the ground of insufficiency of funds in the account of the drawer, is permissible if, between the date of the issue of the cheque and the date of presentation thereof to the bank for payment, a part of the amount, for which the cheque has been drawn, is paid to, and received by, the drawee? These are some of the prominent questions, which the present revision has thrown up for determination.2. This revision is...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Guwahati
I.A. Ansari, J.1. When a lis is brought or a proceeding is instituted in a Court of law, desirable it is that the Court, unless the law indicates otherwise, decides the maintainability of such a lis/proceeding. Howsoever, appealing may be the case of the party bringing the matter before the Court, the Court shall, keeping its mind completely disabused from the impression that it might have formed on the merit of the case, decide the question of maintainability. If the Court finds that the proceeding is not maintainable, the proceeding must terminate without carrying out any exercise to determine the merit or otherwise of the respective cases of the parties concerned and/or ' the question as to what reliefs the parties are entitled to. This rule is, however, subject to certain exceptions, one of such exceptions being that if the proceeding cannot progress on account of omission to implead the necessary party, the Court shall give an opportunity to the person, who approaches the Court, ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Guwahati
Sarjoo Prosad, C.J. 1. This is an application for a writ of certiorari and/or mandamus for quashing the order of the Labour Court dated 26-4-1958, and for preventing the respondent, the State of Assam from taking any action under its notification dated 10-4-1958, whereby it purported to cancel a notification of an earlier date, dated 28-11-1957, under Section 33C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (Act No. XIV of 1947), as amended (hereinafter called the Act). 2. It appears that the petitioner was serving as a head clerk in the Martycherra Tea Estate, which is also a respondent to this application represented by its management. For reasons to which it is not necessary to refer, he was dismissed from service by the Manager of the Tea Estate on 1-3-1955. An attempt was made to effect conciliation of the dispute, which followed the dismissal of the petitioner, between the Union to which the petitioner belonged and the Tea Estate in questionbut it proved ineffective and the Governme...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Guwahati
I.A. Ansari, J.1. We have heard Mr. V.K. Jindal, learned senior Counsel, for the insurer appellant and Mr. S.P. Mahanta, learned Counsel, appearing on behalf of the claimants-respondents.2. By this common judgment and order, we propose to dispose of all the appeals enlisted above, for, on the request of the learned Counsel for the parties, all these appeals have been heard together as the appeals involve largely identical facts and common questions of law, the same are capable of being disposed of together and it is conceded by the learned Counsel for the parties that the decision in any of these appeals will have a bearing on the outcome of the remaining appeals.3. We, first, cull together the material facts and various stages, which have led to the present appeals:(i) On 25.10.1999 at about 7 p.m., the bus bearing registration No. ML 05-9275, owned by the respondent No. 1 herein and driven by respondent No. 2 herein, while carrying contrary to the road permit, more than the permissi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Guwahati
I.A. Ansari, J.1. It is not uncommon for the Courts to be invited to decide the contours of its own powers under a given provisions of law - constitutional or statutory. The present set of Writ Petitions as well as Civil Revision Petitions too call for determination of the scope of the powers of judicial review under Article 226 and power of superintendence under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, on the one hand, and the ambit of the revisional jurisdiction under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, on the other.2. Whether an insurer, under any circumstance, can impugn an award rendered by a Motor Accident Claims Tribunal in an application under Articles 226 and/or 227 of the Constitution of India and whether this constitutional remedy is completely barred so far as an insurer is concerned are the principal questions, which the present set of writ petitions have raised? What has also been raised is the question as to whether an insurer can invoke revisional jurisdiction...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Guwahati
R.S. Bindra, J.C.1. By his judgment dated 31-7-1969, Shri P.N. Roy, Special Judge (II), Manipur, convicted the appellant, Manjunatta George Varaghes under Section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947, hereafter called the Act, and sentenced him to two years' rigorous imprisonment. The sum of Rs. 11,300/-seized from the convict by the Police was directed to be confiscated to the State. Having felt aggrieved, the convict has come up in appeal.2. The facts of the prosecution case, shortly put, are that on getting some firm intelligence, Shri A. Nilamani Singh, Sub-Inspector of Police, rushed to the Tulihal airport and contacted Manjunatta George Varaghes who was one of the passengers to board the plane that was expected to fly shortly afterwards. The Sub-Inspector searched the baggage of Maniunatta George Varaghes and found currency notes of rupees one hundred each of the total value of Rs. 11,300/- inside a pillow forming part of that baggage. The money was seized and the accu...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Guwahati
MEHROTRA, J. - This is an application under article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for - (a) a writ of mandamus calling upon the respondents to withdraw, cancel or forbear from giving effect to the notices issued against the applicant under section 46 (5A) of the Income-tax Act; (b) a writ of certiorari calling upon the respondents to send for the records of the case and the proceedings be thereafter quashed; (c) a writ of prohibition calling upon the respondents to cancel or to forbear from giving effect to or in any way taking any steps in respect of the notices issued under section 46 (5A) of the Income-tax Act.The petitioner carries on business and is regularly assessed to income-tax under the Income-tax Act, hereinafter called the Act. Under section 5 (4) of this Taxation on Income (Investigation Commissioner) Act, 1947, the case of the petitioner was referred to the Income-tax Investigation Commission. An application was then made under section 8A of the said Income-ta...
Tag this Judgment!