SHRI KAGO BUNGU ALIAS BUDHI BUNGU Vs. HIBU CHE TULU CLAN
LAWS(GAU)-2018-2-178
HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI
Decided on February 27,2018

Shri Kago Bungu Alias Budhi Bungu Appellant
VERSUS
Hibu Che Tulu Clan Respondents

JUDGEMENT

AJIT BORTHAKUR,J. - (1.) Heard Mr. S. Koyang, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. K. Tama, learned counsel appearing for the respondent.
(2.) By this petition filed under section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, the petitioner seeks to set aside and quash the impugned order, dated 02.06.2017, passed by the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Lower Subansiri District, Ziro, in Title Suit No. 43/2014.
(3.) The petitioner's case, in a nutshell, is that a Title Suit was instituted against one Shri Hibu Nado, a member of Hibu Che Tulu clan for a decree for declaration of title, possession and interest over the suit land in his favour vide T.S. No. 18/2014, which is pending in the court of learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Lower Subansiri District, Ziro. The Secretary of the said clan lodged a complaint on 16.04.2012 with the Deputy Commissioner, Lower Subansiri District, Ziro (revenue court) for cancellation of land possession certificate (for short 'LPC') of the revision petitioner, which is pending trial. The secretary of the said clan has also instituted a T.S against the revision petitioner in the court of learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Lower Subansiri District, Ziro seeking cancellation of the LPC of the revision petitioner which is pending trial vide T.S. No. 43/2014. The petitioner has contended that the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Ziro ought to have stayed the proceeding which was instituted subsequent to the T.S. No. 43/2014 invoking section 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure, but declined to stay it. The petitioner has further contended that the parties to the said Title Suit did not even file the original documents as required under Order 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure and the trial has been going on the basis of photocopy of the documents which is secondary evidence. On the other hand, the petitioner has contended that the suit land is not identifiable as there is no schedule of the suit land described in the plaint and as such, title, possession and interest of unidentifiable suit land cannot be determined by the Court. According to the petitioner, although the issues are required to be filed after pleadings are completed, the issues have been framed before filing of the written statements by the proforma defendants, in contravention of the laid down procedure for trial of a Civil Suit. Hence, it is prayed to set aside and quash the impugned order, dated 02.06.2017, passed in T.S. No. 43/14 and for a direction to the learned Court below to follow the prescribed procedure under Order 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.