Court : Guwahati
Decided on : Apr-04-2001
P.G. Agarwal, J.1. In Letters Patent Appeal No. 1/99 and 3/98, vide a common order dated 10.2.99, the matter, regarding maintainability of Letters Patent Appeal against an order of the Single Judge before the Division Bench, was referred to the Full Bench.2. We have heard Mr. A.K. Phukan, senior Advocate and Mr. S. Sarma learned counsel for the appellants and Mr. N.M. Lahiri, Senior Advocate for the respondents.3. Although the facts in L.P.A 1/99 and 3/98 are not much relevant for the purpose of deciding the issue before us, we can advert to them to appreciate the question raised in this Reference. The respondent plaintiff instituted Civil suit before the Deputy Commissioner, judicial, who function as the District Judge of Dimapur, Nagaland, for relief under Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958. Plaintiff also sought temporary injunction and the learned Presiding Officer thereafter granted ex-parte injunction as prayed for. Feeling aggrieved the respondents preferred Misc. First App...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Guwahati
Decided on : Apr-04-2001
P.G. Agarwal, J.1. In Letters Patent Appeal No. 1/99 and 3/98, vide a common order dated 10.2.99, the matter, regarding maintainability of Letters Patent Appeal against an order of the Single Judge before the Division Bench, was referred to the Full Bench.2. We have heard Mr. A.K. Phukan, senior Advocate and Mr. S. Sarma learned counsel for the appellants and Mr. N.M. Lahiri, Senior Advocate for the respondents.3. Although the facts in L.P.A 1/99 and 3/98 are not much relevant for the purpose of deciding the issue before us, we can advert to them to appreciate the question raised in this Reference. The respondent plaintiff instituted Civil suit before the Deputy Commissioner, judicial, who function as the District Judge of Dimapur, Nagaland, for relief under Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958. Plaintiff also sought temporary injunction and the learned Presiding Officer thereafter granted ex-parte injunction as prayed for. Feeling aggrieved the respondents preferred Misc. First Appea...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Guwahati
Decided on : Aug-09-2001
A.K. Patnaik, J. 1. This is an appeal under Section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act, 1961'). 2. The respondent herein carries on the business of a hospital. For the assessment year 1994-95, the respondent claimed a deduction under Section 80HH and Section 80-I of the Act of 1961, amounting to Rs. 14,85,387. The Assessing Officer, namely, the Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax (Assessment), Special Range-I, Guwahati, in his assessment order under Section 143(3) of the Act of 1961, dated March 5, 1997, held that since the assessee-company was not an industrial undertaking, it was not eligible for deduction under Sections 80HH and 80-I of the Act of 1961. Against thesaid order of assessment, the respondent filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), Guwahati. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) held that the issue as to whether the respondent was entitled to deduction under Sections 80HH and 80-I of the Act of 1961, had been...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Guwahati
Decided on : Mar-19-2001
A.K. Patnaik, J. 1. The case of the nine (9) petitioners in this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution is that they have been engaged by the Deputy Superintending Engineer, Oil & Natural Gas Corporation Ltd. Lakwa Unit, for daily cleaning, maintenance and allied works, etc. since the year 1988 through the work orders issued from time to time. Their further case is that although in the work orders the petitioners have been referred to as contractors, the petitioners themselves have been doing the aforesaid work relating to daily cleaning, maintenance, allied works, etc. bringing additional persons as and when necessary to carry out the said work. Despite the fact that the petitioners have rendered their services for such daily cleaning, maintenance and allied works in the Lakwa Unit of the respondent No. 4 continuously for more than 12 years, the Oil & Natural Gas Corporation Limited, (for short, 'the corporation'), has issued a notice on May 23, 2000 in the newspaper in...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Guwahati
Decided on : Jun-26-2001
1. All the eight writ petitions having raised common questions of lawand fact, they are taken up for consideration together and are being disposed of by this common judgment and order. 2. WP(C) Nos. 152/2001, 160/2001, 323/2001, 383/2001, 728/2001 and 2381/2001. The aforesaid writ petitions have been filed by persons aggrieved by an order dated 30.12.2000 appointing 92 persons as Sub Inspectors of Food and Civil Supplies on ad hoc basis. In the aforesaid order, it has been mentioned that the ad hoc appointments are purely temporary and in the nature of appointments under Regulation 3(f) of the Assam Public Service Commission (Limitation and Function) Regulation, 1951. The said appointments have been stated to have been made for a period of 3 (three) months or till the filling up of vacancies as per provisions of the Assam (Food and Civil Supplies) Service Rules, 1970 whichever is earlier. The writ petitioners pray for quashing of the aforesaid order of appointment dated 30.12.2000 ...
Tag this Judgment!