Judgment

NATARAJAN, J.:- This appeal by special leave has been preferred against the dismissal of Civil Revision No. 10(H)/ 72 in a common judgment rendered by the Gauhati High Court in Civil Revisions Nos. 9(H)/72 and 10(H)/72. By two separate but concurring judgments, Baharul Islam, J., as he then was, and Bindra, J., dismissed both the civil revision petitions but with differing observations as to the procedure that should be followed by the Courts in Nagaland in dealing with cases before them. We are not now concerned with those matters.

2. Before we proceed to set out the details of the case and the decision rendered by the High Court, it is relevant to mention that the Civil Procedure Code and the Criminal Procedure Code do not govern the proceedings before the Civil and Criminal Courts in Nagaland and the proceedings are to be governed by Rule 30 of the Rules for the Administration of Justice and Police in the Nagaland Hills District. The Rules lay down that the spirit of the Civil Procedure Code and the Criminal Procedure Code should be followed in the disposal of civil and criminal cases. It has been held by this Court in State of Nagaland v. Ratan Singh, (1966) 3 SCR 830 that the Rules of 1937 framed by the Governor of Assam under the powers vested in him by Section 6 of the Scheduled District Act were validly enacted and the rules were successively preserved by Sections 292 and 293 of the Government of India Act, 1935, Section 18 of the Indian Independence Act, 1947 and Article 372 of the Constitution.

3. Coming now to the proceedings between the parties, they commenced as under. On July 17, 1969, four persons of Japu village, namely, Tibongba Ao, Wabangba Ao, Tinukaba Ao and Chubakumba Ao (hereinafter referred to as the plaintiffs) presented a petition to the Deputy Commissioner, Nagaland, complaining about trespass committed by two members of Changki village viz. Subongmedong Ao and Tsungdongkaba Ao (hereinafter referred to as the defendants) on an extent of 4-1/2 acres of land in their possession. They averred in their complaint that by an order dated 16-5-1936 the SubDivisional Officer had permitted the villagers of Changki, Japu and Chungliemson "to open Panikhetis in the land known as Arjan Subedar Grant" and the said order was later approved by the Deputy Commissioner, Kohima, on 31-3-1939. Before the passing of the order dated 16-5-1936, the people of Aotophomi village had been permitted by the Government to occupy the whole of the land given by way of grant by the British Government to one Arjan Subedar but the people of Aotophomi had failed to bring the land under plough. Hence the land was made over to the people of the three villages viz. Changki, Japu and Chungliemson in 1936. The extent of land given to each of the three villages was demarcated by the Sub Divisional Officer and thereafter the people of the three villages had been peaceably enjoying the respective extents allotted to them. However, the defendants trespassed on the 11th and 12th of July, 1960, upon an extent of 4-1/2 acres of land in the possession of the plaintiffs and destroyed a large number of plants grown on the land. The plaintiffs therefore sought the recovery of possession of the 4-1/2 acres of land.

4. The complaint was made over to Shri S. B. Chatri, Magistrate, 1st Class, Mokokchung for disposal by the Deputy Commissioner, Mokokchung.

5. The defendants did not file any written statement but nevertheless set up a defence that the plaintiffs were not entitled to the 4 1/2 acres of land claimed by them. In the course of the proceedings, the villages of Japu and Changki intervened in order to support the case of their respective inhabitants. Thus Japu village supported the plaintiffs and Changki village supported the defendants.

6. After examining two witnesses on the side of the plaintiffs, four witnesses on the side of the defendants and three court witnesses, the Magistrate, 1st class held that the 4-1 / 2 acres of land had been in t