Validity of land and house passes, burden of proof in establishing ownership and construction of habitable house within stipulated period.

MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA, J.

1. Heard Mrs. Dinari T. Azyu, learned counsel for the appellant as well as Mr. A.K. Rokhum, learned Addl. Advocate General for all the State respondents.

2. The appellant was the plaintiff in Title Suit No. 27/2003. The appellant has prayed for setting aside the Judgment & Order dated 07.12.2011, passed by the learned Senior Civil Judge - I, Aizawl, dismissing the Title Suit No. 27/2003.

3. The appellant's case in brief is that the respondents have encroached upon the land of the plaintiff, which was originally covered by Village Council Pass dated 25.11.1973, issued by the President of Luangmual Village Council.

4. The appellant's counsel submits that the appellant was the original owner of the land covered by Village Council Pass dated 25.11.1973 and the said land was divided into 12 plots of land and converted to 12 House Passes, which are as follows:

Sl. No.	Plot No.	H. Pass No.	Area	Name of the Pass Holder
1.	1	349 of 1995	900 Sq.m	Lalrinliana Colney
2.	2	102 of 1996	1200 "	Siamphunga
3.	3	103 of 1996	1000 "	Thanseii
4.	4	353 of 1995	750 "	Laldinpuii
5.	5	104 of 1996	760 "	Vanlalhruaia
6.	6	352 of 1995	975 "	Lalbiakmawia
7.	7	105 of 1976	760 "	Lalrintluanga
8.	8	351 of 1995	1328 "	Lalengmawii
9.	9	350 of 1995	990 "	Lalhmingmawii
10.	10	101 of 1996	514 "	Lalnuntluangi
11.	11	354 of 1995	1065 "	Lalhruaia
12.	12	106 of 1996	1212 "	Lalrammawia

5. The appellant's counsel submits the owners of the 12 plots of land covered by the House Passes thereafter tried to construct buildings on the said land. However, they were obstructed by the respondents, who had started burying dead bodies on their lands and also constructed a huge water tank. The appellant's counsel also submits that the respondents land covered by DPL No. 85/1977 is adjacent to the appellant's land and there is no overlapping of the respondents land with the appellant's land. The appellant herein had however, already constructed his house within the land, at the time of it being covered by the Village Council Pass. The appellant thereafter applied for conversion of House Pass into Land Settlement Certificate and the application is still pending before the Government. As the House Pass owners were not allowed to construct their buildings on their land, which had been encroached by the respondents, the appellant Siamphunga filed Title Suit No. 27/2003, praying for a decree, declaring that the Pass issued by the Village Council in favor of the plaintiff/appellant was valid and the conversion of the Village Council Pass into 12 House Passes by the Revenue Department was also valid. The appellant also prayed for a decree to convert the 12 House Passes into Land Settlement Certificates. The appellant also prayed that the water pipes and the bodies buried on the appellant's land should be removed and that the respondents should be restricted from interfering with the peaceful possession of the land covered by the 12 House Passes. A prayer for payment of compensation of Rs. 1 lakh was also made.

6. The Court of the learned Senior Civil Judge - I, Aizawl thereafter framed 4 (four) issues in Title Suit No. 27/2003. However, the Trial Court discussed eight issues and vide Judgment & Order dated 07.12.2011 dismissed the Suit on the ground that the Suit was not maintainable and that it had been filed beyond the limitation period. The learned Trial Court also held that the appellant did not have the locus standi to make any prayer for a decree in respect of the other 11 House Pass holders, as they were not parties to the case. Further, those 11 House Pass owners did not give any power of attorney or authorization to the appellant to act on their behalf.

7. The learned counsel for the appellan