Back
THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
KARDAK ETE
Pegmir Tarak Son of Late Pegmir Takar – Appellant
Versus
Pegmir Punu Son of Late Pegmir Neni – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(KARDAK ETE, J.)
Heard Mr. N. Danggen, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. T. Nikam, learned counsel for the respondent.
2. This Civil Revision Petition under Section 115 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, is directed against the order dated 20.08.2024 passed in Misc. Case No. 14/2024 arising out of T.S. No. 08/2016, by the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Ziro, District Lower Subansiri, Arunachal Pradesh, whereby, the review petition seeking review of the order dated 23.01.2024 and 24.01.2024 with a prayer to allow the petitioner to examine and adduce evidence has been rejected.
3. The case in brief is that the respondent herein filed a Title Suit being T.S. No. 08/2016 in the Court of Civil Judge, Senior Division, Ziro and the petitioner has been arrayed as defendant No.3. The claim of the respondent in the Title Suit is that his land at Harakso, Juli, Tor, Nguduk Yorbe, Suikhi Happa, Hokagaab, Moya, Pong, Herikh which was inherited from his forefather late Pegmir Lel. The suit has been instituted in the capacity of duly authorized descendant of late Pegmir Lel families claiming that the land
Procedural rules should not obstruct justice; parties must have the opportunity to present their case unless serious prejudice is caused to the opposing party.
Court can exercise its power of review only when there is an error apparent on the face of the record and an error which is to be fished out by a process of reasoning cannot be said to be an error ap....
The plaintiffs cannot claim a mere declaration of title without seeking further relief for possession, as stipulated by Section 34 of the Specific Relief Act, rendering the suit not maintainable.
The appellate court emphasized the necessity of treating counter-claims with the same rigor as original suits, mandating separate decrees and proper procedural adherence.
Non-appearance during an appeal hearing should be adequately justified to warrant a review based on Order 47 Rule 1 of CPC.
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
