Back
IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH
SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND
Nilu Gogoi @ Nilu Gogoi Chetia W/o Late Dibya Chetia – Appellant
Versus
Lakhima Dutta Saikia W/o Ratul Saikia – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. introduction of parties and case background (Para 1) |
| 2. appellant's contention regarding trial court errors (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 3. respondent's defense against allegations (Para 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 4. representation of counsel and party identifiers (Para 9) |
| 5. issues framed by the trial court (Para 10 , 11) |
| 6. trial court's findings on borrowing amounts (Para 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 7. rejection of defendant's manipulation claims (Para 15) |
| 8. appellate court's dismissal of appeal (Para 16 , 17) |
| 9. evaluation of witness testimonies (Para 18 , 19 , 20) |
| 10. substantial questions of law identified (Para 21 , 22 , 23 , 24) |
| 11. concurrent finding upheld between courts (Para 25 , 26 , 27) |
| 12. affirmation of previous judgments (Para 28 , 29) |
| 13. judgment of dismissal issued (Para 30) |
| 14. summary of court orders and costs (Para 31 , 32) |
JUDGEMENT AND ORDER :
SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND, J.
1. Nilu Gogoi is the appellant who is aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 09.01.2024 and 19.01.2024, passed by the learned Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Lakhimpur, North Lakhimpur in Money Appeal No. 01/2021, upholding the judgment and decree dated 09.02.2021 and 19.02.2021, passed by the learned Civil Judge (Jr. Divisi
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
