JUDGMENT AND ORDER (CAV)

Indira Shah, J. - By filing this petition under Section 50 of the Assam Frontier (Administration of Justice) Regulation, 1945, the petitioner has challenged the judgment and order dated 6.7.2011 passed by learned Additional Deputy Commissioner, West Siang District Basar in Case No. BSR/JDL (LK-176/10-11 Vol-III, Vol-II/175) whereby the keba decision dated 26.05.2011 has been set aside on the ground of limitation.

2. Heard Mr. P.K. Tiwari, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. N. Ratan, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Mr. K. Lollen, learned counsel appearing for respondent No. 1 and Mr. K. Jini, learned counsel appearing for respondent No. 2.

3. The petitioner lodged a complaint dated 09.05.2011 to the Additional Deputy Commissioner, Basar, stating that the disputed land namely Keba Rijo near old market at Basar is his ancestral property. The respondent No. 2, Marbe Basar, illegally sold the land to Karjum Basar (respondent No. 1). On his prayer the matter was referred to Bango Level Keba for settlement of dispute.

4. It would be appropriate to reproduce the translated copy of Keba decision hereunder:-

"Translated Copy

KEBA Decision

No. BSR/LK-176/10-11-VILL-11/6

Today on this 26.05.2011, the Basar Bango Level Keba decided the WRC land dispute in between Sri Jumkar Basar son of Sri Gejum Basar of Gori Village and Sri Marbe Basor of Soi Village. It is decided under the Chairmanship of Shri Goken Bam (CHGB). We the selected Keba members heard both the complainant and respondent Sri Jumkar Basar stated that the land sold out by Sri Marbe Basar belongs to him but due to some domestic problem. He could not have raised objection earlier. Anti Sri Marbe Basar states that the land was cultivated by my father also there was no complain from any side. Sri Marbe Basar further stated that he does not have any idea from where the land comes to him. Upon hearing the witnesses and both the parties, the selected Keba members decided that upon hearing the history of the land we found that the disputed land belongs to Sri Jumkar Basar. And for developing the land Sri Jumkar Basar is to give one female Mithun to Sri Marbe Basar. All the Keba members held that the land belongs to Henjum clan."

5. Aggrieved by the Keba decision, respondent No. 1 preferred an appeal before the Additional Deputy Commissioner, West Siang District under Section 46 of the Assam Frontier (Administration of Justice) Regulation wherein he alleged that the Keba decision was passed without impleading him as one of the respondent and thereby no opportunity of hearing was given to him. He claimed that he, since 02.04.1989, i.e., from the date of purchase of the disputed land, has been cultivating the land without any disturbance and therefore, he has acquired title by way of adverse possession.

6. After hearing learned counsels for both sides, following issues were framed by the appellate Court :-

"Whether appeal filed by the appellant is maintainable? Whether the appellant has right to file appeal against the decision of the Keba?

Whether sale transaction between Marbe Basar and Karjum Basar is sustainable as per law?

If appellant has not pleaded for non admissibility in lower Court can the appellant plead as per limitation act in appellant Court?

Whether the first application filed by Sri Jumkar Basar is admissible as per Limitation Act?

7. Learned Additional Deputy Commissioner held that appeal was maintainable as the petitioner in his complaint had mentioned that Marbe Basar (respondent No. 2) illegally sold his land to Katjum Basar (respondent No. 1). Therefore Karjum Basar comes under the definition of "Any person" under Section 46(1) of the Regulation, 1945.

8. It was further held by the Appellate Authority that although the sale transaction been respondent No. 1 & 2 was documented on plain paper with revenue stamp in particular settings of Arunachal Pradesh it was valid document.

9. While deciding the third issue on limitation it was observed tha

Click Here to Read the rest of this document