Back
IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA, J.
Mr. P.C Zoliana, S/o Saizama (L) - Appellant
Versus
Mr. Lalnunruata Pachuau, S/o P.C Thanzuala (L) – Respondent
RFA No. 14 of 2016
Decided on : 29-09-2022.
Decree – Suit – Appellant has by way of present Regular First Appeal prayed for setting aside impugned ex-parte Judgment & Decree Court of learned Senior Civil Judge – Learned counsel for appellant learned senior counsel for respondent – Held, Court notice issued to appellant in Title Suit cannot be said to have been served upon appellant findings of learned Trial Court appears to be erroneous on this count – Court impugned ex-parte judgment and Order is not sustainable and appellant should be allowed to take part in proceedings – Court Senior Civil Judge shall fix next appellant and respondents are directed to appear personally or through their counsels Court of learned Civil Judge – Appeal is accordingly allowed.
JUDGMENT :
Heard Mr. R. Lalnunpuia, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. C. Lalramzauva, learned senior counsel for the respondent No.1.
2. The appellant has, by way of the present Regular First Appeal, prayed for setting aside the impugned ex-parte Judgment & Decree dated 22.04.2016 passed by the Court of the learned Senior Civil Judge, Lunglei in Title Suit No. 5/2015.
3. The only ground of challenge taken by the appellant against the impugned ex-parte Judgment & Decree dated 22.04.2016 passed in Title Suit No. 5/2015, is that no summon/notice was received by the appellant and as such, the appellant could not participate in the proceedings in Title Suit No. 5/2015.
4. The appellant’s case is that one Mr. Saizama and his wife, Mrs. P.C. Biaktluangi had 5 (five) children, namely, (i) Mr. P.C. Thanzuala (father of the respondent No. 1), (ii) Ms. P.C. Darhmingliani, (iii) Mr. P.C. Zoliana (appellant), (iv) Mr. P.C. Zahranga and (v) Mr. P.C. Lalchhawnsanga.
5. Mr. Saizama was the owner of land and building covered by Huan Pass No. 3/L of 1967. Mr. Saizama expired on 02.04.1968. Thereafter, Mr. Saizama’s wife, Mrs. P.C. Biaktluangi applied for a Heirship Certificate in favour of their youngest son, Mr. P.C. Lalchhawnsanga. Consequent to the same, Heirship Certificate was given to Mr. P.C. Lalchhawnsanga and Huan Pass No. 3/L of 1967 was converted into LSC No. 203/1979. LSC No. 203/1979 was made in the name of Mr. P.C. Lalchhawnsanga.
6. Mr. P.C. Lalchhawnsanga expired in the year 2000. Thereafter, Mr. P.C. Thanzuala (father of the respondent No. 1) mutated LSC No. 203/1979 in his name. LSC No. 203/1979 was thereafter superseded by LSC No. 208802/01/4 of 2012 and the same was made in the name of Mr. P.C. Thanzuala (father of the respondent No. 1).
7. On the death of Mr. P.C. Thanzuala, who expired on 03.08.2011, the appellant filed an application for grant of Heirship Certificate in respect of LSC No. 208802/01/4 of 2012. The Court of the Civil Judge-I thereafter issued Heirship Certificate No. 44/2012 to the appellant on 20.06.2012. Heirship Certificate No. 44/2012 states as follows:-
8. The respondent No. 1 being aggrieved by the issuance of an Heirship Certificate, in respect of his father’s land covered by LSC No. 208802/01/4 of 2012, to the appellant vide Heirship Certificate No. 44/2012, filed Review Petition No. 2/2014. Review Petition was allowed vide Order dated 09.06.2015 by the Court of the learned Senior Civil Judge, Lunglei, who directed that the Heirship Certificate No. 44/2012 should be re-heard.
9. The Court of the learned Senior Civil Judge, Lunglei issued Order dated 03.08.2015 in Heirship Certificate No. 44/2012, by holding that the prayer for issuance of an Heirship Certificate could not be adjudicated and as such, the appellant was advised to approach a Court of competent jurisdiction for determination of his rights and the issue raised in Heirship Certificate No. 44/2012. The application submitted by the appellant in Heirship Certificate No. 44/2012 was also returned to the appellant on 03.08.2015.
10. Subsequent to the above facts, the respondent No. 1 filed Title Suit No. 5/2015 in the Court of the learned Senior Civil Judge, Lunglei, praying for a declaration that the mutation of the LSC No. 208802/01/4 of 2012, belonging to his father, Mr. P.C. Thanzuala (L) in the name of the appellant was illegal, null and void. Further, the LSC No. 208802/01/4 of 2012 should be restored to its rightful owner and for a decree declaring that the respondent No. 1 was the legal and rightful owner of the land and building covered by LSC No. 208802/01/4 of 2012.
11. Title Suit No. 5/2015 was disposed of ex-parte by the Court of the learned Senior Civ
Possession of Land Settlement Certificates is conclusive proof of ownership, and procedural mislabeling does not affect the substantive justice in Heirship Certificate cases.
The court established that an unregistered Gift Deed lacks legal validity and that only direct heirs have standing to contest Heirship Certificates under the applicable laws.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that ownership rights over land must be supported by valid evidence and in accordance with the provisions of the Mizo District (Land and Revenue) A....
The issuance of a Heirship Certificate must comply with principles of natural justice, including the right to a fair hearing, especially when it affects property rights.
Point of Law : Surviving husband of the deceased has rightly made the application for issuing the Heirship Certificate in the name of his only daughter.
Tenancy Act, 1971 lays down provision in Section 23 by which a tenant can seek ownership of a plot of land on certain conditions.
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
