1. Heard Ms. Esther, the learned counsel for the appellants. Also heard Mr. Pfosekho, the learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 1 to 10.

2. This is a second appeal under section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 against the judgment and order dated 21.12.2016 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Dimapur in Civil Appeal No. 1/2015. The present respondents as the petitioners approached the pro forma respondent, i.e., the Padumpukhuri Village Council for recovery of debts as claimed by them from the present appellant No. 1. The respondents also asked the appellant No. 1 to give an undertaking for repayment of loan. As such on 28.3.2015, the appellant No. 1 gave an undertaking to repay the debts to the respondents within a period stipulated by the Village Council. The said Council vide judgment and order dated 1.6.2015 decided that the appellant No. 1 owed principal amount of Rs. 1,04,50,000/- to the respondents. The appellant No. 1 was directed to repay the amount to the respondents within a period of one year and the breakup of the said amount to be repaid was in installments as per the finding of the Village Council. It would not be out of place to mention here that the present appellant No. 2 was not a party in the proceeding before the Village Council. The decision and direction to repay the loan to the respondents was given by the Village Council only to the appellant No. 1. On the other hand, the Village Council accepted the claim made by the respondents as the principal amount borrowed by the appellant No. 1. While the appellant No. 1 asserted to have repaid in excess of the principal amount the same was not considered by the Village Council. The amount of Rs. 1,04,50,000 includes interest as calculated and claimed by the respondents which the present appellant disputes. The respondents thereafter made an application dated 19.6.2015 to the Village Council to give certain conditions in case of failure by the appellant No. 1 to repay the loan within the stipulated time period as fixed by the Village Council. The said prayer made by the respondents was disallowed and thereafter the respondents again made an application on 13.8.2015 thereby seeking for a direction that both the appellant No. 1 and her husband, appellant No. 2 be held liable for repayment of the loan on the monthly basis and that the properties owned by the appellant No. 2 be pledged as collateral security for the repayment of the loan. The same was also rejected on the ground that the Village Council cannot review the judgment and order dated 1.6.2015.

3. Being aggrieved by such refusal by the Village Council, the respondents filed Civil Appeal No. 1/2015 in the learned Court of Civil Judge (Senior Division), Dimapiir. The said appeal was filed under order 41 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (‘CPC’). The relief sought in the said appeal was to set aside and quash the Village Council's judgment and order dated 1.6.2015 and to restrain the present appellants from alienating any property and to direct the appellant Nos. 1 and 2 to make repayment of the loan on monthly installment basis. In support of the claim made by the respondents some undertakings allegedly to be made by the appellant No. 1 to repay the loan on various interest rates were also annexed.

4. The present appellants filed affidavit-in-opposition denying the claim categorically and further pleaded that the appellant No. 1 borrowed the said amount for one Mr. Noken Longkumer and appellant No. 2 had no knowledge with regard to the said transaction. Another plea was taken that the loan transaction was made between the respondents and the appellant No. 1 on behalf of Mr. Noken Longkumer. As such it was stated that the present appellant No. 2 is not liable for repayment of the loan.

5. The learned Civil Judge by the impugned judgment and order dated 21.12.2016 set aside the final order and judgment dated 1.6.2015 passed by the Village Council and held that the appellan