Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI
KALYAN RAI SURANA, J.
Horjum Lollen - Petitioner
Versus
Dago Lollen - Respondent
CRP No. 46(AP) of 2016
Decided On : 11-05-2017
Tempering of Boundary - Land - Petitioner submits that learned Deputy Commissioner had arbitrarily mechanically and illegally rejected said appeal on non-sustainable grounds which are firstly that intimation of appeal was duly submitted before appellate authority on rejection of his complaint and secondly appeal was nomenclatured as a complaint instead of being addressed as an appeal - In this regard It is submitted that although he had submitted not only said appeal in form of a complaint but also he had filed a separate objection about against decision taken by village authority Keba and therefore there was due compliance of provisions of appeal as provided under regulation of Frontier Regulations - It is further submitted as regards ground of impugned order that in a mechanical manner merely on perusal of village Authority Keba decision from whom disputed land was purchased had stated that boundary of disputed land as settled by village Authority Keba was correct and there was no alteration/tempering of boundary - Held, Having considered rival submissions and materials available in present revision petition this court is of view that as per provision of regulation which provides that no pleader be allowed to appear before Court of Deputy Commissioner or Assistant Deputy Commissioner save and except with permission of Deputy Commissioner therefore alleged defect in form to file an appeal if any cannot be permitted to vitiate appeal filed by petitioner herein - From complaint as well as objection filed in present case before appellate authority it is apparent that same was filed by petitioner himself without assistance of any counsel - Further it is directed that said learned appellate authority concerned would give notice of appearance upon parties and to afford an opportunity of hearing to both parties and pass a fresh decision thereof on merit in accordance with law - Patties are at liberty to produce a certified copy of this order before learned Deputy Commissioner District who on receipt of same shall restore appeal filed by petitioner to file and shall proceed to hear parties by giving adequate opportunities to them and shall pass appropriate order in accordance with law - Petition stands allowed.
1. Heard Mr. D. Loyi, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr. K. Lollen, learned counsel for the sole respondent.
2. The brief facts of this revision petition is that pursuant to the directions issued by the learned Deputy Commissioner, West Siang District, Aalo vide an Order bearing No. AR-9/TS “KON GIDA” dated 12.1.2016 held that the Head Gaonburah of village - Kombo Tarsu would arrange a Keba in connection with the dispute between the parties herein, subject to an undertaking by the petitioner before the Deputy Commissioner, Aalo that he would appear before the village authority on the date fixed for hearing. The Keba so organized by an order dated 11.2.2016 upheld the previous Keba order dated 18.11.2015 and affirmed the boundary as demarcated on 18.11.2015. Thereafter, the petitioner by a letter dated 23.2.2016 informed the Head Gam of the village of Kon-Gida that he did not agree with the decision of Keba taken on 19.2.2016 and also informed about the non-acceptance of Keba decision and intimation to file an appeal. This was followed by a letter to the Deputy Commissioner, West Siang District, Aalo under the heading - “Compliant against the village authority of Kombo Tarsu for conducting the land dispute, Keba between Horjum Lollen v. Duda Lollen without visiting the disputed land, while the owner and parties repeatedly requested them to visit the disputed land. And prayer for issue appropriate direction or order for conduct of Keba at the disputed site by re-demarcate the land as per the original record. This was followed by another letter dated 25.7.2016 to the Deputy Commissioner, West Siang District, Aalo under the heading “Objection against the illegal decision passed by the village authority of Kombo Tarsu Mobuk in land dispute case between Horjum Lollen v. Duda Lollen and appeal for take up the matter in Appellate forum for final disposal of the matter”. As an enclosure to the said objection dated 25.7.2016, there was a letter written by one Sri Gedo Lollen, who is stated to be the seller of the disputed land, stating therein that the Keba Members did not allow him nor one Sri Ligo Lollen to show the actual boundary of the land in question. However, the learned Deputy Commissioner, West Siang District, Aalo by the Order bearing No. AR-9-TS ‘KON GIDA’ dated 16.8.2016, rejected the complaint filed against the village authority Keba decision, as being devoid of merit. The order so passed by the said authority is quoted hereinbelow for ready reference:
“To
Shri Horjum Lollen,
Village Tarsu Mobuk,
PO/PS Aalo,
West Siang District (AP)
Whereas, you have filed an appeal petition to the Deputy Commissioner, Aalo against the village Authority Keba decision in the matter of money lending case and land dispute in between you and Shri Duda Lollen of Kombo Tarsu Mobuk.
Whereas, on perusal of case records your appeal petition filed against the village Authority keba decision not found genuine on the following grounds:
(I) Whereas, you have not filed notice of intention to appeal before the village Authority keeping the provisions of under section 45(2) of AFR, 1945.
(II) Whereas, you have lodged a complaint against the village Authority decision, which is not just, as there is no provision of complaint against the village Authority. In the AFR 1945 which governs local cases. Rather you should have been filed an appeal petition against the village Authority decision keeping the due procedure under the provision of AFR 1945.
(III) Whereas, on perusal of village Authority Keba decision Shri Gedo Lollen from whom you have purchased the disputed land stated before the village Authority, that boundary of the disputed land settled by the village Authority is correct as there is no altercation/tempering of the boundary as claimed by you.
In the light of above facts and circumferences, your complaint filed against the village Authority Keba decision without merit is hereby rejected.
Sd/-
Deputy Commissioner,
West Siang District, Aal
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
