Back
MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA
State of Nagaland, Rep. by the Secretary to the Government of Nagaland – Appellant
Versus
Chenio Lotha – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(Mridul Kumar Kalita, J.) :
1. By order dated 16.05.2023, this appeal was directed to be heard ex-parte,under Order 41 Rule 17 (2) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, as the learned counsel for the respondents failed to appear on consecutive dates, when this appeal was listed for hearing. Heard Ms. V. Suokhrie, learned Additional Advocate General, Nagaland for the appellants. None has appeared for the respondents.
2. This second appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, has been filed by the State of Nagaland and three other appellants, impugning the decree and judgment dated 18.10.2017, passed by learned Principal District Judge, Dimapur in Civil Appeal No. 1/2015, whereby the judgment and decree dated 02.03.2015 passed by learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Dimapur in Title Suit No. 1/2007 was set aside.
3. At the time of admission of this regular second appeal (RSA), following substantial questions of law were formulated.
The first appellate court must engage in a thorough examination of the evidence and issues before reversing a trial court's judgment, ensuring that its decision is based on a proper understanding of ....
The first appellate court's findings of fact are final unless found to be manifestly perverse or contrary to the evidence on record.
The failure to establish lawful possession and the invalidity of the allotment order led to the dismissal of the appeal, emphasizing jurisdictional limits in civil suits regarding land allotments.
The court upheld the lower courts' findings, emphasizing the limited scope of re-appreciating evidence in second appeals under Section 100 CPC.
An appellate judgment is not vitiated by the failure to frame formal points for determination if the decision reflects substantial compliance through thorough analysis of evidence. Additionally, civi....
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.
[The court established that land declared as protected forest under the Indian Forest Act cannot be claimed by individuals without valid title, and that any prior claims based on unregistered documen....
The court affirmed that unchallenged land settlement orders establish ownership rights, overriding claims of prior possession without legal backing.
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
