Back
DEVASHIS BARUAH
Pfuzhalie Nakhro S/o Late Puvi Nakhro – Appellant
Versus
Ketseyie Mere S/o Late Duokienyu Mere – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
DEVASHIS BARUAH, J.
1. Heard Mr. N. Mozhui, learned counsel assisted by Ms. N. Rupreo, appearing for the petitioner and also heard Mr. Taka Masa, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Arenlong, appearing for the respondent.
2. This is an application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, read with Rule 32 of the Rules for Administration of Justice and Police in Nagaland, 1937 (For short the Rules) and Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, for quashing the Political Case No. 3/2021 pending before the Dobashi’s Court, Kohima; for quashing the communication dated 06.04.2021 to the President of the Tholo Nakhro clan, as well as also the show-cause notice dated 29.04.2021 issued by the Head Dobashi’s Court, Kohima, to the petitioner stating inter-alia, if the petitioner failed to appear, a warrant of arrest would be issued against him.
3. The case of the petitioner in brief is that a dispute arose between the petitioner’s clan i.e. Tholo Nakhro clan and one Mr. Rokonizo. The petitioner’s clan being aggrieved with the decision of the Dobashi’s Court dated 17.04.2012 preferred an appeal before the Assistant to the Deputy Commissioner (Judicial), Kohima, now d
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the Dobhasi Court (DBs) does not have the appellate jurisdiction to decide the appeal filed against the decision of the Village Council, as pe....
A party who voluntarily participates in legal proceedings and allows a decision to attain finality over an inordinate period without protest or appeal is precluded from challenging the jurisdictional....
Not affording an opportunity to rebut claims of parties by allowing them to lead evidence either oral or documentary shall negate very foundation requirements of not only provisions but also lead to ....
Only civil courts have jurisdiction to determine ownership and rights over land, while administrative authorities must adhere to the statutory framework, as established in this case.
Exclusion of Civil Court's jurisdiction by special statute and the powers of the statutory tribunal were central to the Court's decision.
The failure to afford a hearing in administrative proceedings undermines the validity of the actions taken, emphasizing the necessity of natural justice.
The court confirmed that review powers do not extend to revising decisions made by higher authority under applicable claims legislation.
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
