SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2020 Supreme(Gau) 356

MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA, SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI
Jomgum Padu – Appellant
Versus
State of Arunachal Pradesh – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Indraneel Chowdhury, Advocate

JUDGMENT

1. Heard Mr. N. Ratan, learned counsel for the appellants. Also heard Mr. S. Tapin, learned Senior Govt. Advocate for the respondent Nos. 1 & 2 as well as Mr. R. Saikia, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 3 to 6.

2. This appeal has been filed by the Head Gaon Burah, Darka-III as the appellant No. 1 and one Sh. Pegam Ete as the appellant No. 2, against the judgment & order dated 12.12.2019 passed by the learned Single Judge in WP(C) No. 310(AP)/2018, by which the writ petition was allowed.

wxyz

The learned Single Judge vide the impugned judgment has set aside the order passed by the village authority Ex-Communicating the respondent Nos. 1 to 4/writ petitioners and their family members from the village Darka-I and Darka-II and imposed exemplary cost of Rs. 20,000/- on the respondent Nos. 5 & 6.

zyxw

3. The brief facts of the case is that the respondent No. 1 lodged a complaint with the Head Gaon Burahs of Darka-I and Darka-II against the appellant No. 2, on the ground that the appellant No. 2 was encroaching upon the "Guar land" of the respondent No. 1 by excavating the land. Thereafter, the respondent No. 1 apparently re-erected the damaged fencing of the land. As the res

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top