SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2015 Supreme(SC) 858

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
RANJAN GOGOI, N.V. RAMANA, JJ.
J. Thansiama – Appellant
Versus
State of Mizoram & Ors. – Respondents
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 3536 OF 2008
Decided on : 08-09-2015

IMPORTANT POINT
The Limitation Act, 1963 applies to the State of Mizoram.

Headnote:Administration of Justice – Limitation Act, 1963 – North-Eastern Areas (Reorganisation) Act, 1971 – Section 77 – Government of Assam, in 1966, notifying that provisions of Limitation Act will not apply to tribal areas of the State including the erstwhile Mizo district – After creation of the Union Territory of Mizoram, the area ceased to be part of State of Assam – The notification of 1966 no more applicable to State of Mizoram – Section 24General Clauses Act – Not applicable. (Para 9, 14)

       (1996) 8 SCC 741 – Relied upon

       1987 (2) GLR 221 – Distinguished

       Facts of the case:

       The issue in this case is whether the Limitation Act, 1963 applies to the State of Mizoram.

       The Gauhati High Court by the impugned judgment and order has held the Limitation Act, 1963 to be applicable to the State of Mizoram.

       Consequently the suit filed by the appellant for declaration of title etc. was dismissed as being time barred.

       This was in reversal of the decree passed by the Trial Court on merits after holding that the Limitation Act, 1963 would not be applicable to bar the suit of the appellant-plaintiff.

       Finding of the Court:

       Impugned judgment does not warrant interference.

       Result: Appeal dismissed.

Judgment

Ranjan Gogoi, J.

1. The Gauhati High Court by the impugned judgment and order dated 01.08.2005 has held the Limitation Act, 1963 to be applicable to the State of Mizoram. Consequential to the said conclusion of the High Court, the suit filed by the appellant for declaration of title etc. was dismissed as being time barred. This was in reversal of the decree passed by the learned Trial Court on merits after holding that the Limitation Act, 1963 would not be applicable to bar the suit of the appellant-plaintiff.

2. The High Court in a very exhaustive and illuminating judgment has traced the history of the creation of the present day State of Mizoram. Equally, the laborious arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties have thrown further light into the evolution of the present day State. However, we do not consider it necessary to burden this order by referring to the said details except to record what would be strictly required for the purposes of the present adjudication, namely, that the present day State of Mizoram was earlier known as Lushai Hills District and formed part of the original undivided State of Assam. The said district was included in the list of tribal areas of the State of Assam under Part-A of the table appended to Para 20 of the Sixth Schedule to the Constitution. Thereafter, Lushai Hills District was renamed as Mizo District by the Lushai Hills District (Change of Name) Act, 1954. A consequential change in Para 20 of the Sixth Schedule to the Constitution was also made.

3. Para 20 of the Sixth Schedule as it was at the point of time relevant to the case [on 14.3.1966 or prior to the changes brought in by North-Eastern Areas (Reorganisation) Act, 1971] read as follows :

“Tribal Areas 20. (1) The areas specified in Parts A and B of the table below shall be the tribal areas within the State of Assam.

(2) The United Khasi-Jaintia Hills District shall comprise the territories which before the commencement of this Constitution were known as the Khasi States and the Khasi and Jaintia Hills District, excluding any areas for the time being comprised within the cantonment and municipality of Shillong but, including so much of the area comprised within the municipality of Shillong as formed part of the Khasi State of Mylliem :

Provided that for the purposes of clauses (e) and (f) of sub-paragraph (1), paragraph 3, paragraph 4, paragraph 5, paragraph 6, sub-paragraph (2), clauses (a), (b) and (d) of sub-paragraph (3) and sub-paragraph (4) of paragraph 8, and clause (d) of sub-paragraph (2) of paragraph 10 of this Schedule, no part of the area comprised within the municipality of Shillong shall be deemed to be within the district.

(2a) The Mizo District shall comprise the areas which at the commencement of this Constitution was known as the Lushai Hills District...

(3) Any reference in the table below to any district (other than the United Khasi-Jaintia Hills District and the Mizo District) or administrative area shall be construed as a reference to that district or area at the commencement of this Constitution :

Provided that the tribal areas specified in Part B of the table below shall not include any such areas in the plains as may, with the previous approval of the President, be notified by the Governor of Assam in that behalf.

TABLE

PART A

1. The United Khasi-Jaintia Hills District.

2. The Garo Hills District.

3. The Mizo District.

4. ******

5. The North Cachar Hills

6. The Mikir Hills.

PART B

****** ****** ***** ***** *****”

4. The Governor of Assam issued Notification bearing No. TAD/GA/12/64 dated 14.3.1966 whereby the operation of the Limitation Act 1963 was excluded from the tribal areas of Assam as specified in the Sixth Schedule of the Constitution, the details of which have been extracted above. The Notification dated 14.3.1966 is in the following terms :

“In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (b) of the sub-paragraph (1) and sub-paragraph (2) of paragraph 12 of the Sixth Schedule to the Constitution



















Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top