This revision is directed against the Judgment and decree dated 28-1-1992 passed by the learned addl. Deputy Commissioner (J) Mokokchung in Civil Appeal No. 7/90.

2. I have heard Mr. B. N. Sarma, learned counsel for the revisionist as well as Mr. Temjen, counsel for the respondents.

3. One of the main grounds taken in this revision petition is ground m reads as under;

"(m) For that the suit is bad for non-joinder of necessary party namely the State of Nagaland and therefore no executable order could be made in the present case."

4. It is contended by Mr. B. N. Sarma that the suit is not maintainable for non joinder of necessary party namely; the State of Nagaland in as such as the land in dispute is under the perpetual occupation of the State of Nagaland. In this connection, Mr. Sarma referred to the plaint filed by the Respondent/Plaintiff particularly paras 5 and 6 of the plaint. In para 5, it has been stated that in the year 1890, the British Administrative troops came and occupied the paddy fields under the present disputed land, and the British administrative authorities had ever remained in occupation of the said field since then.

5. In para 6 of the plaint it is averred