TAGI, G.B. Vs. ADDITIONAL DY. COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS case raises an interesting question concerning the fixation of village boundaries and the rights which flow to the concerned villagers from it, necessarily imparting the idea of the duty of the concerned villagers of preserving, not violating, the village boundary (common frontier); otherwise there is the likelihood of recurrence of the kind of "war-fare" that was quite common between adjacent villages. The dispute here relates to the boundary between the villages of Tening and Tepon, which were known in the older times as Henima and Dupema, respectively.

(2.) THE facts leading to the fixation of the boundary between the two villages in the year 1947 have been set out in the order, Annexure-11 to this petition, which has been filed on behalf of the villagers of Tepon; it is a copy of the decision made by Mr. S. J. Duncan in, what is known in this area as, Political Case No. 41 of 1947. The older names of the two villages of Tening and Tepon, Henima and Dupema, respectively figure in Annexure-11, as well as some other documents filed in this case. The decision was made by Mr. S. J. Duncan on the basis of a local enquiry which he made concerning the dispute. He made reference to the boundary between the two villages which had been laid by Sir Charles Pawsey (who was stated to be the Deputy Commissioner, Naga Hills, upto 1947) in the following terms :-

(3.) THE land was thereupon cultivated by Henima (Tening) in 1947 as per the said decision. No protest is alleged to have been made by Dupema (Tepon) at the time of Henima (Tening) cultivating the Jhums, i.e. during the process of cultivation; nor was there any protest made with regard to Henima (Tening) cultivating and Henima (Tening) thereafter gathering the harvest; nonetheless Dupema (Tepon) joined in a body and almost completely damaged the granaries of two Henima men. A report was received through Henima that Dupema was "preparing for war."