CHELLISH SANGMA Vs. LABINA SANGMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ appeal is directed against the judgment and order of the learned Single Bench (learned Single Judge) dated 26.08.2011 allowing the writ petition i.e. WP(C)No.84(SH)2003 filed by the principal respondents/writ petitioners wherein, the learned Single Judge held that who could be the Nokma of Jendragre Akhing had been decided in the year 1937 by the Deputy Commissioner, Garo Hills vide order dated 07.08.1937, which remains unchallenged and accepted for the last more than 70 years, shall not be opened on the objection raised by the present appellants i.e. respondents No.5 & 6 in the writ petition, after they slept over the matter for the last 70 years and thereby set aside the impugned order dated 28.01.1999 passed by the Executive Member, I/C Revenue, Garo Hills District Council, Tura declaring that respondents No.5 & 6 are the Nokmas of Jendragiri Akhing and also the order dated 08.01.2003 passed by the Chief Executive Member, Garo Hills District Council, Tura in GDC -Rev/Appl. No.22A/C of 1999 for rejecting the appeal and upheld the judgment and order dated 28.01.1999 passed by the Executive Member, I/C Revenue, Garo Hills District Council, Tura.

(2.) HEARD Mr. K Paul, learned counsel for the appellants i.e. respondents No.5 & 6 in the writ petition, Mr. VK Jindal, learned senior counsel assisted by Ms. QB Lamare, learned counsel appearing for the principal respondents/writ petitioners and Mr. S Dey, learned counsel for the proforma respondents.

(3.) THE present appellants did not file affidavit -in -opposition in the writ petition. However, learned Single Judge was lenient enough to consider the verbal submission of fact by the learned counsel appearing for the appellants. But party can only succeeds their case only on the basis of fact mentioned in the pleadings and in the absence of pleadings, whatever be the submission made by the learned counsel for the party regarding the fact, cannot be the basis for deciding the fact of the case.