Court : Guwahati
Decided on : Jan-17-2007
A.H. Saikia, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.2. This appeal has been directed against the judgment dated 02.02.1999 passed by the learned Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation (for short, 'the Commissioner') in Title Suit (W.C.) 24 of 1996 dismissing the claim petition so preferred by the appellant as claimant seeking compensation under the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 (for short, 'the Act') 4ue to injury suffered by him in an accident in course of his duty as driver while driving the vehicle in question involved in the accident, holding that the appellant was not entitled to get any compensation basically on the sole ground that he failed to examine the doctors who gave the disability certificate as well as the discharge certificates on different dates.3. Assailing the impugned judgment, the learned Counsel representing the appellant, has strenuously contended that the learned Commissioner has committed a patent error of law in observing that due to non-examination o...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Guwahati
Decided on : Feb-06-2007
I.A. Ansari, J.1. Can an order, passed by the High Court, in a revision under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure (in short, 'the Code'), against an order, which a trial court had passed during the course of the progress of a trial, operate as res judicata as regards the question, which the High Court decides in such a revision? Is it legally permissible for a court to extend the period of filing of written statement, in a civil suit, beyond the period of 90 days from the date of service of summons on the defendant and, if so, under what conditions, such an extension of time can be allowed? Can a mere collector of rent be regarded, within the meaning of the definition of 'landlord' as given in Section 2(c) of the Assam Urban Areas Rent Control Act, 1972 (in short, 'the Act'), a 'landlord' for the purpose of enabling such a collector of rent to institute a suit, in his own name, for recovery of arrear rent and/or for eviction of a tenant from the tenanted premises if the tenante...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Guwahati
Decided on : Mar-16-2007
Amitava Roy, J.1. The validity of the proceedings under the Payment of Wages Act, 1936 (hereafter referred to as the Wages Act) as well as that under the Bengal Public Demands Recovery Act, 1913 (hereafter referred to as the Recovery Act) before the Assistant Labour Commissioner, Tinsukia, respondent No. 2 and the Certificate Officer, Tinsukia, respondent No. 3 respectively, orders passed therein and the eventual auction sale of the petitioner's land pursuant thereto, constitute the subject matter of assailment in the instant petition. This Court by order dated 14.9.2004 while issuing notice of motion had in the interim directed the private respondents not to alter the features of the land to involved and the maintain the status quo thereof. The disbursement of the sale proceeds was also kept in abeyance.2. I have heard Mr. K. Agarwal, Advocate for the petitioner assisted by Mr. V.K. Bhatra, Advocate, Mr. B.J. Talukdar, Additional Sr. Government Advocate for the official respondents, ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Guwahati
Decided on : Jun-19-2007
T. Nanda Kumar Singh, J.1. This second appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 26.5.2000 passed by the learned District Judge, Nagaon in Title Appeal No. 4 of 1999 allowing the appeal by reversing the judgment and decree passed on 1.4.1999 in the Title Suit No. 29 of 1990 by the Civil Judge (Senior Division). The present appellant is the plaintiff No. 2 in Title Suit No. 29 of 1990 of the Court of Civil Judge (Senior Division), Nagaon. The present appeal was admitted for hearing on the four (4) substantial questions of law, one of which being substantial question No. 4 is quoted below:4) Whether the possession of land on the basis of the admitted invalid document is ipso facto sufficient to categorize the possession as adverse against the vendor as well as the whole world, and if so, in the circumstances of the case, the learned lower appellate court was legally entitled to insist for adducing separate oral evidence for determination of adverse possession over the lan...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Guwahati
Decided on : Jun-22-2007
Amitava Roy, J.1. The extra ordinary jurisdiction of this Court is sought to be invoked against the order dated 30.6.2006 of the District Magistrate, Dibrugarh, directing closure of the petitioner hospital and the notice dated 1.11.2006 of the Director of Health Services, Assam withdrawing the 'no objection certificate' dated 13.9.2006 permitting its provisional operation pending registration under the Assam Health Establishment Act, 1993 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') and for grant of licence thereunder. In the face of intervening developments during the pendency of this proceeding the challenge stood extended also to the minutes of the meeting of the Scrutiny committee under the Act held on 7.8.2006 and 18.8.2006 as well as the enquiry report dated 6.3.2007 and the decision of the State Health Authority (hereinafter referred to as the 'Authority') dated 14.3.2007 on the basis thereof withholding the registration and the licence to it.2. I have heard Mr. P.J. Saikia, learned ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Guwahati
Decided on : Aug-16-2007
Amitava Roy, J.1. Whereas the appeal registers a challenge to the order dated 9.4.2007 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Jorhat in Misc (J) Case No. 102/2007 arising out of Title Suit No. 1/2007 granting ad interim injunction in favour of the respondents/plaintiffs restraining the petitioner, his men, agents etc. from dispossessing them (respondents-plaintiffs) from the suit property pending disposal of the suit, the revision petition is directed against an order of the same date passed in Misc (J) Case No. 4/2007 registered on an application filed under Order 21, Rule 29 of the Code of Civil Procedure (hereinafter referred to as the 'Code') in Title Execution Case No. 1/2007 by the respondent-plaintiff, thereby staying the proceeding till disposal of the aforementioned suit. By the said order, the application under Section 47 of the Code submitted for stay of the execution proceeding by the Opposite party/judgment debtor was also allowed.2. Misc Case No. 1916/2007 ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Guwahati
Decided on : Jan-09-2007
Amitava Roy, J.1. The award dated 19.08.1996 passed by the Central Government Industrial Tribunal, Calcutta, (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal) rendered in Reference No. 42/1981 directing reinstatement of the persons involved in the industrial dispute with back wages as indicated herein constitutes the subject matter of the instant proceeding. Being aggrieved thereby, the Food Corporation of India, Guwahati, (hereafter referred to as the Corporation) is before this Court seeking redress.2. I have heard Mr. P.K. Roy, learned Standing Counsel for the Corporation assisted by Mr. S.K. Chakraborty, Advocate. By application No. Misc. Case 57/2000, seven such persons had prayed for their impleadment as party respondent. On a consideration of the statements made, the prayer is hereby allowed. The applicants would stand impleaded as respondents 3 to 9. I have heard Mr. I. Hussain, Advocate for the newly impleaded respondents.3. The facts in brief leading to the filing of the instant pet...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Guwahati
Decided on : Jan-19-2007
T.N.K. Singh, J.1. This Writ Petition (PIL) is an unique petition filed by 10 (ten) different political parties, despite sharp difference on various issues. The issues raised in the present writ petition are of far reaching constitutional significance as they have a direct bearing on democracy which constitute a basic feature of our Constitution and also that the delimitation exercise and re-adjustment of the territorial constituencies in the State are required to be carried out on the basis of the census figures.2. Heard Mr. Raju Ramchandran, learned Senior Advocate, Mr. N.P.C. Singh, Senior Advocate and Mr. S. Biswajit Singh, Advocate for the petitioners and Mr. K. Kumar Singh, learned C.G.S.C. for the respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3 and Mr. N. Ibotombi Singh, learned Counsel for the respondent No. 4 and 6 and learned Advocate General, for the respondent No. 5.3. By an order of this Court dated 04.12.2006 passed in C. Misc (PIL) No. 12.2006,5 (five) social organizations have been implead...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Guwahati
Decided on : Jan-31-2007
..... the amount so recovered, after deducting all costs and expenses, including the costs not recovered from the defendant, shall be divided amongst the before-mentioned parties, or any of them, in such shares as the court by its judgment or decree shall direct.30. section 2 of the act of 1855, it may be pointed out, reads ..... plain meaning,. there need be, according to the apex court, in girdharilal & sons (supra) no meek and mute submission of the plainness of the language. to avoid patent injustice, anomaly or absurdity or to avoid invalidation of a law, the court would be well justified, observes the apex court, in girdharilal & sons (supra), in departing fro ..... permit a common error to pass for right'. this maxim was applied by the apex court in raman nadar viswanathan nadar v. snehappoo rasalamma reported in : [1970]2scr471 . in raman nadar viswanathan nadar (supra), a three-judge bench of the supreme court, having noticed that under hindu law, a bequest ..... words 'suit' and 'action' are, sometimes, used synonymously see throp v. rutherford 43 p. 2d 907, 910, 150 or 157. the words 'action' and 'suit', as used in statutes of limitation, are generally synonymous see whifield v. burrell 118 sw ..... those secured by the courts of equity were called equitable rights. the legal rights and remedies were made available by common law courts, because these rights were recognized and enforced in the courts of common law; whereas equitable rights were granted by the courts of equity.39. as the courts .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Guwahati
Decided on : Mar-29-2007
I.A. Ansari, J.1. The respondent No. 1 herein is an association of contractors and suppliers of the Public Works Department, Government of Nagaland. The respondent, as writ petitioner, filed a writ petition, which gave rise to WP (C) No. 37(K)/2007, its case being, in brief, thus, the petitioner is a guild of contractors and suppliers based at Dimapur and carries construction work and supplies to the establishment of Executive Engineer, PWD (Housing Division), Nagaland. As many as 329 members of the petitioner association carried out the contract works and made supplies to the said establishment. In course of time, as much as Rs. 91,14,847 fell due for payment to the said 329 members of the petitioner association. Despite repeated demands raised by the petitioner association, no payment has been made by the department concerned. As members of the petitioner association had borrowed money, on interest, from various sources, non-payment of bills have been causing great hardship to the m...
Tag this Judgment!