IMPORTANT POINT
Possession of Land Settlement Certificates is conclusive proof of ownership, and procedural mislabeling does not affect the substantive justice in Heirship Certificate cases.

J UDGMENT :

KAUSHIK GOSWAMI, J.

Heard Mr. Joseph L. Renthlei, learned Counsel for the appellants. Also heard Mr. F. Lalengliana, learned Counsel appearing for the sole respondent.

2. This Second Appeal is presented against the Judgment & Order dated 19.10.2016 passed by learned Additional District Judge, Aizawl Judicial District, Aizawl, in RFA No. 3/2016.

3. The brief facts of the case are as follows: -

The respondent/petitioner after the death of her husband on 27.03.2010, applied for issuance of Heirship Certificate before the learned Court of Civil Judge, Aizawl District, Aizawl, (herein after referred to as “the trial Court”) in respect of LSC No. Azl-1549 of 1994, LSC No.674 of 1987, LSC No.671 of 1987, and LSC No. 103302/01/623 of 2008 which was numbered and registered as Heirship Certificate Case No. 467/2010. Upon receipt of the aforesaid application, notice was issued in two local daily newspapers calling for objection. Thereafter, the appellant/respondents jointly submitted objection against the said application, to which the respondent/petitioner submitted written statement along with documents. The trial Court thereafter framed the issue as “whether the petitioner is entitled to be declared as the legal heirs in respect of the property left by her husband Mr. Zoramliana Chawngthu”.

4. Upon commencement of the trial, the respondent/petitioner examined herself and another witness and also exhibited 10 documents. Thereafter the appellant/respondents examined themselves and two other witnesses and also exhibited the written objection filed by them, which was marked as Exhibit-D1. The trial Court after closing the evidence and hearing the parties by Judgment & Order dated 03.02.2016 was pleased to grant the Heirship Certificate in respect of the subject land in favour of the respondent/petitioners. Against the aforesaid judgement & order the appellant/respondent filed an appeal under Order 41, read with Section 96 of Code of Civil Procedure , 1908 as well as section 17(3) of Mizoram Civil Courts Act , 2005. The First Appellate Court after hearing the parties by judgment & order dated 19.10.2016 was pleased to dismiss the appeal by affirming the Judgment & Order dated 03.02.2016 passed by the trial Court.

5. Aggrieved by the aforesaid judgment & order of the First Appellate Court, the appellant/respondent preferred the instant second appeal, wherein this Court by Order dated 08.12.2016 while admitting the appeal formulated the substantial questions of law which are as hereunder: -

(i) Whether the lower courts committed an error of law by assigning ownership of suit lands to the deceased husband only on the basis of mutation, without examining the legality of the transfer of the suit lands to the deceased husband as per the requirement of law and by wrongly absolving the respondent of the burden of proving the same, thereby erroneously attributing a legal effect of ownership to the LSC certificates.

(ii) Whether the trial court committed an error of law by allowing the respondent herein to proceed and base her entire pleading on the document titled a “reply” to a “counter - claim” despite the fact that there had been no counter-claim made and by penalizing the appellants herein for not making any reply to the said document.

6. Mr. Joseph L. Renthlei, learned counsel for the appellant/respondents submits that the title and ownership of the respondent/petitioner being objected by the appellant/respondents in the Heirship Certificate case, it was imperative for the trial Court to first determine the ownership of the respondent/petitioner’s husband over the subject land. In support of the aforesaid submission, he relies upon the decision of the Co-ordinate Bench of this Cou