Back
MARLI VANKUNG
Sh. Zothanseia – Appellant
Versus
Sh. Chawngkhuma (L) through his legal heir Chawngthantluanga S/o Darnghaka – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Heard Mr. Johny L. Tochhawng, learned counsel for the appellant along with Mr. Lalremtluanga, learned counsel for respondent No.1 and Mrs. H. Lalmalsawmi, learned Govt. Advocate for respondent Nos. 2-6.
2. This is an appeal under Section 96 of CPC read with Section 17 of the Mizoram Civil Courts (Amendment) Act, 2021 for setting aside the Order dated 20.04.2021 passed by the Senior Civil Judge, Kolasib in Civil Suit No. 3/2018.
3. The case of the appellant in brief is that the appellant land covered by his Periodic Patta 1903 of 1976 (bifurcated into two PPs in 2006) is overlapped by the Land Settlement Certificate W-42 of 1987 belonging to the respondent No.1. The appellant/plaintiff came to know of such encroachment of his land, in the year 2004 and the appellant/plaintiff being aggrieved by such encroachment filed the Civil Suit No. 3/2018 before the Senior Civil Judge, Kolasib for an order of cancellation of the Land Settlement Certificate No. W-42 of 1987. While the Civil Suit was pending at the pre hearing stage, the appellant found his lost diary and from the contends of his diary, he discovered some mistake in the dates mentioned in his plaint.He then had filed an a
The main legal point established is that a suit filed beyond the limitation period stipulated under the Limitation Act cannot be entertained by the court.
The determination of the cause of action and the opportunity for both parties to present evidence are crucial for ensuring a fair trial.
This Court also concurs with the submissions made by learned counsel for the respondents that in exercise of its powers under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the trial court has the discretion to allow amendments to pleadings at any stage of the proceedings, provided it does not cause injustice or p....
Settlement of forest land is void without prior Central approval under the Forest (Conservation) Act; a jurisdictional error does not validate an illegal title.
Ex parte judgments must adhere to procedural requirements of the CPC; otherwise, such judgments can be ruled illegal and set aside, especially when they affect public rights.
All necessary amendments for determining the real questions in controversy should be allowed, provided it does not cause injustice or prejudice to the other side. Delay alone cannot be a ground to di....
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
