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

1984 Supreme(Gau) 55

GAUHATI HIGH COURT
K. N. SAIKIA, B. L. HANSARIA AND Dr. T. N. SINGH, JJ.
Atenjenba and others -Appellant
Versus
State of Nagaland and others -Respondent
Civil Rule No. 241 of 1976
Decided On : 03-05-1984

Advocates Appeared:
N.N. Saikia, J.P. Bhattacharjee, Advocate-General, Nagaland and Z. Anzami, Govt. Advocate, Nagaland

The D. B. Court was a tribal customary court and had been exercising powers since a long time. The Nagaland Assembly had passed the Rules for the Administration of Justice and Police (Second Amendment) Act, 1982 which received the assent of the President of India on 15-11-1983. The Act gave retrospective effect from 1-12-1963 and the word "Dobhasis" must now be deemed to have been inserted with effect from that date. The action taken or decisions rendered by such courts during the period from 1st Dec. 63 till the passing of the Act must be deemed to have been taken or rendered under the provisions of the Rules for the Administration of Justice and Police in Nagaland as amended.

Headnote:

NAGALAND RULES FOR ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE AND POLICE - AMENDMENT - DOBAHSIS CUSTOMARY COURT - JURISDICTION - DOBAHSIS CUSTOMARY COURT IS A TRIBAL CUSTOMARY COURT AND HAS BEEN EXERCISING POWERS SINCE A LONG TIME - NAGALAND ASSEMBLY PASSED THE RULES FOR THE ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE AND POLICE (SECOND AMENDMENT) ACT, 1982 WHICH RECEIVED THE ASSENT OF THE PRESIDENT OF INDIA ON 15-11-1983 - THE ACT GIVES RETROSPECTIVE EFFECT FROM 1-12-1963 AND THE WORD "DOBAHSIS" MUST NOW BE DEEMED TO HAVE BEEN INSERTED WITH EFFECT FROM THAT DATE - THE ACTION TAKEN OR DECISIONS RENDERED BY SUCH COURTS DURING THE PERIOD FROM 1ST DEC. 63 TILL THE PASSING OF THE ACT MUST BE DEEMED TO HAVE BEEN TAKEN OR RENDERED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THE RULES FOR THE ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE AND POLICE IN NAGALAND AS AMENDED.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioners challenged the decision of the Dobhasis Customary Court (D. B. Court) on the ground that the D. B. Court had no jurisdiction to decide the dispute as it was not mentioned in the Rules for the Administration of Justice and Police in Nagaland, 1937.

Finding of the Court:

The court held that the D. B. Court was a tribal customary court and had been exercising powers since a long time. The court also held that the Nagaland Assembly had passed the Rules for the Administration of Justice and Police (Second Amendment) Act, 1982 which received the assent of the President of India on 15-11-1983. The Act gave retrospective effect from 1-12-1963 and the word "Dobhasis" must now be deemed to have been inserted with effect from that date. The action taken or decisions rendered by such courts during the period from 1st Dec. 63 till the passing of the Act must be deemed to have been taken or rendered under the provisions of the Rules for the Administration of Justice and Police in Nagaland as amended.

Issues: Whether the D. B. Court had jurisdiction to decide the dispute.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the D. B. Court was a tribal customary court and had been exercising powers since a long time. The court also held that the Nagaland Assembly had passed the Rules for the Administration of Justice and Police (Second Amendment) Act, 1982 which received the assent of the President of India on 15-11-1983. The Act gave retrospective effect from 1-12-1963 and the word "Dobhasis" must now be deemed to have been inserted with effect from that date. The action taken or decisions rendered by such courts during the period from 1st Dec. 63 till the passing of the Act must be deemed to have been taken or rendered under the provisions of the Rules for the Administration of Justice and Police in Nagaland as amended.

Final Decision: The court dismissed the petition and held that the question of lack of jurisdiction can no longer arise after the amendment of the Rules.

Judgement

SAIKIA, J.:- In this application under Art.226/227 of the Constitution seeking a writ in the nature of certiorari/quo warranto or any other suitable writ, the petitioner impugns a decision of the Political Assistant to Deputy Commissioner and Dobhasis Customary Court (for short D. B. Court), Mokakchung in case No. 329/76 (Khensa villagers case) dt. 23rd April/76.

2. Two villagers of Khensa, namely, Tekayangdang Bara and Imnasucha G. B. submitted a complaint to the D. B. Court D. C.s office at Mokakchung stating that during the visit of Chungtia elders to their village for discussion of public interest Khensa elders purchased a cow for entertainment for which the seven persons, namely, Atenjenba Chunjangrepa, Merentosni, Tsukjummeren, Senwatiba, Akangsangba and Mapukaba refused to contribute the subscription and so they prayed that the D. B. Court should decide the dispute. The D. B. Court summoned the said seven persons to explain the complaint. On 23rd April, 1976 the D. B. Court attended by eleven members, gave decision to the following effect:

"1. Chungtia village authorities sent news to Khensa elders for discussion of important matters and so the elders prepared curry for the purpose. This is understood to be correct Therefore, there should be no misunderstanding about the purchase of curry and the Court understood that it should be paid off.

2. According to Ao custom the Court understands that Aksu (pork) should be given between two villages but extra collection of subscription from public by elders is understood to be improper. But the cost of Aksu as well as curry should be collected from public. This is D. B.s Court decision."

2A. The seven writ petitioners challenged that decision mainly on the ground that the D. B. Court was nowhere mentioned in the Rules for the Administration of Justice and Police in Nagaland, 1937 and as such the said Court had no jurisdiction to decide the dispute and accordingly the petitioners prayed that a writ of Quo Warranto should be issued on respondents Nos. 3 to 14 who were members of the D. B. Court to disclose the authority under which they were functioning as Dobhasiss Customary Court and for Mandamus restraining them from further functioning as such and also for a Writ of Certiorari quashing the aforesaid decision of D. B. Court dt. 23rd April/76.

3. The State of Nagaland has resisted the petition filing an affidavit-in-opposition stating that D. B. Court had always been administering justice in Nagaland In para 12 of the affidavit-in-opposition it has been stated that "the D. B. Courts have been in existence since a long time and have been exercising powers of the tribal customary Court ever since without any interruption. Although no rules have been made in this regard, these Courts have not been barred from exercising their powers and functions by any law in force. These Courts are in the nature of customary tribal Courts which by itself have the customary sanction and are in existence from ancient times". It has been further stated that the Dobhasis are men of position versed in customary laws in force in Nagaland and the people of Nagaland find the system of D. B. Courts convenient and suitable for them.

4. We have now been shown that the Nagaland Assembly has since passed the Rules for the Administration of Justice and Police (Second Amendment) Act, 1982 which received the assent of the President of India on 15-11-1983. Ss.2, 3 and 4 of the Act provide as follows :

"2. In Rules 15, 17, 18, 19, 22(d), 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 31 and 38 of the Rules for Administration of Justice and Police in Nagaland, 1937 the word "Dobhasis" shall be inserted and shall be deemed to have been inserted with effect from 1st Dec. 1963 after the word "headmen of khels" wherever the said words appear in the aforesaid Rules.

3. The following shall be inserted after the R.15-A of the Rules for the Administration of Justice and Police in Nagaland, 1937 as R.15-A A.

"15-AA. The Dobhasis henceforward





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