Back
2020 Supreme(Gau) 545
GAUHATI HIGH COURT (AIZAWL BENCH)
Michael Zothankhuma, J.
State Of Mizoram - Appellant
Versus
Kapnghingi - Respondent
Regular First Appeal; Civil Miscellaneous Applicatition; 19 of 2014, 142 of 2014
Decided On : 25-06-2020
C. Zoramchhana, Advocate, Dinari T Azyu, Advocate, Victor L Ralte, Advocate, K. Roland, Advocate, R. Lalsawirema, Advocate, H. Laltanpuia, Advocate, Zairemsangpuii, Advocate
The respondent failed to prove their ownership of the land occupied by the appellants, and the Civil Suit was barred by limitation.
Headnote:
Land Dispute - Civil Suit - Lushai Hills District (House Sites) Act, 1953, Mizo District (Land and Revenue) Act, 1956, Mizo District (Agricultural Land) Act, 1963 - The court found that the Civil Suit was barred by limitation, and the respondent failed to prove their ownership of the land occupied by the appellants. The impugned Judgment and Decree dated 25.07.2013 passed in Civil Suit No. 33/2010 is set aside.
Fact of the Case:
The respondent filed a Civil Suit for payment of rent and compensation for illegal occupation of their land by the Assam Rifles and the State Government. The Trial Court decreed in favor of the respondent, but the State Government appealed the decision.
Finding of the Court:
The Court found that the Civil Suit was barred by limitation, and the respondent failed to prove their ownership of the land occupied by the appellants.
Issues: The main issues were the maintainability of the suit, the occupation of the land by the Assam Rifles and the State Government, and the entitlement of the respondent to the relief claimed.
Ratio Decidendi: The Court held that the Civil Suit was barred by limitation, and the respondent failed to establish their rights, titles, and interests over the said lands.
Final Decision: The impugned Judgment and Decree dated 25.07.2013 passed in Civil Suit No. 33/2010 is set aside. The appeal is allowed.
JUDGMENT
Michael Zothankhuma, J. - Mr. C. Zoramchhana, learned Additional Advocate General appears for the appellants. Mrs. Dinari T. Azyu appears for the respondent Nos. 1 to 3 and Ms. Zairemsangpuii appears for respondent Nos. 4 to 7.
2. This Regular First Appeal has been filed by the State of Mizoram against the Judgment & Decree dated 25.07.2013, passed by the Court of the Senior Civil Judge, Lunglei in Civil Suit No. 33/2010 and the Order dated 15.07.2014, passed in Execution Petition No. 6/2014. The impugned Judgment & Decree dated 25.07.2013 passed in Civil Suit No. 33/2010, has decreed that the plaintiffs/respondent Nos. 1 to 3 are the rightful owner of the suit lands and that the Deputy Commissioner, Lunglei District and Commissioner/Secretary to the Government of Mizoram, General Administration Department, Mizoram are liable to pay compensation to the respondent Nos. 1 to 3 for their illegal occupation of the suit lands, for the period from 1986.
3. The brief facts of the case is that Civil Suit No. 33/2010 had been filed by the respondent Nos. 1 to 3/plaintiffs for payment of rent @ Rs. 5 per sq. ft. per month for the period from 1966 to 1986 onwards for occupation of their land by the Assam Rifles from 1966 to 1986 and by the State Government from 1986 onwards. The other prayer made by the respondent Nos. 1 to 3 in their suit was for payment of compensation for damage crops and buildings. They further prayed for a decree to be issued to the appellants to vacate the suit land. The facts, as set out by the respondent Nos. 1 to 3 in their plaint was that the plaintiffs and their parents were given a plot of land at Thingsai by the Chief of Thingsai. Accordingly, they had settled there after the death of their parents till the year, 1966. The area of the land of the respondent No. 1 was 30 bighas, respondent no. 2 was 10 bighas and respondent No. 3 was 15 bighas. When disturbance arose in Mizoram in the year 1966, one Company of the 19th Assam Rifles came to Thingsai Village and forcibly occupied the land of the respondent Nos. 1 to 3. The said land was used as a dropping area whereby supplies used to be dropped from the area for the Assam Rifles. The Assam Rifles left the village in the year, 1986. The Government of Mizoram constructed some buildings on the suit land in the year 1974, which included the Administrative Officer''s Office, quarters and also a supply go-down, as the said land is still being occupied by the State Government without payment of rent. The State Government was also liable to pay rent to the respondent Nos. 1 to 3 w.e.f., 1986.
4. Written Statement was submitted by the Union of India and the State of Mizoram, wherein they stated that the suit was barred by limitation and that there was no cause of action in favour of the respondent Nos. 1 to 3. They also stated that the respondent Nos. 1 to 3 could not produce any Land Record Certificate to prove their title over the suit land. Also, no notice under Section 18 CPC was served upon the Government and that the plaintiff has no locus standi to file the suit.
5. The learned Trial Court thereafter framed 5 (five) issues on 21.09.2011, which are as follows:-
wxyz
(1) Whether the suit is maintainable in its present form and style
zyxw
wxyz
(2) Whether the 19 th Assam Rifles has any pass or Land Lease issued by competent authority for settlement at the side of Thingsai
zyxw
wxyz
(3) Whether the defend and forcefully occupied and settled inside the land of the plaintiff
zyxw
wxyz
(4) Whether the joint inspection or investigation of the suit land had been done by the defendant in order to assertain the occupation of the land of the plaintiff by 19 th Assam Rifle and other Battalion.
zyxw
wxyz
(5) Whether the plaintiff is entitled to the relief claimed? If so, to what extend and who is liable"
zyxw
6. The Trial Court thereafter examined 4 plaintiff witnesses, one defendant witness for the State Government and another defendant witness for the Union of India. The Tria
