IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH AT KOHIMA BENCH
YARENJUNGLA LONGKUMER, J.
The Secretary To The Govt Of Nagaland And Anr. - Appellant
Vs.
Shri Lhousakhotuo Vumero And Anr. - Respondent
REVN No. 6 Of 2024
Decided On : 22-07-2025
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. revision petition context (Para 1 , 3) |
| 2. land acquisition details (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 3. judicial proceedings history (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 4. jurisdiction issues raised (Para 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 5. writ petition filed by respondent (Para 17 , 18 , 19 , 20) |
| 6. pending civil suit complication (Para 21 , 22 , 23) |
| 7. amendment application complexity (Para 24 , 25) |
| 8. arguments against amendment approval (Para 26 , 27 , 28 , 29) |
| 9. legal citation on amendments (Para 30 , 31) |
| 10. arguments for amendment approval (Para 32 , 33) |
| 11. court considerations on the amendment (Para 35 , 36 , 37 , 38) |
| 12. judicial review principles (Para 39 , 40 , 41) |
| 13. court's final decision (Para 42 , 43 , 44) |
JUDGMENT & ORDER :
YARENJUNGLA LONGKUMER, J.
The present Revision Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner assailing the Order dated 26.09.2023 passed by the Civil Judge Senior Division, Kohima, Nagaland, in CMC No. 2/2020 arising out of Civil Suit No.2/2017.
2. The petitioner has invoked the supervisory power of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution by questioning the propriety of the impugned order dated 26.09.2023 passed by the learned Civil Judge Senior Division, Kohima whereby the learned trial court allowed the amendment in the plaint at a belated stage after the commencement of the trial.
3. I have heard learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner, Mr. C. T. Jamir, assisted Mr. Imkong Jamir and also Mr. R. Iralu, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. L. Iralu. The Deputy Commissioner, Kohima is represented by Mr. K. Angami, Senior Govt Advocate.
4. The brief facts of the case leading to the filing of this petition is that sometime in 1968-1969 the Government had started the process of acquiring land at Aradura, Kohima belonging to Kohima and Phesama village which was proposed to be acquired by the Department of Transport and Communication, Nagaland for the Nagaland State Transport (NST).
5. The Transport Department was asked to deposit a sum of Rupees two lakhs, towards the cost of land to be paid to the land owners. The Transport Department had deposited the said amount and as such the department acquired the land from eight different land owners and to that effect the Gaonbura of T-Khel, Kohima Village has also certified the purchase of the land by the Transport department. The said land in question was thereafter, acquired by the NST Department through the District Administration.
6. After acquisition of the land by the Government, the construction work was taken up and on completion of necessary official formalities the Public Works Department, Government of Nagaland, undertook and completed the construction of the Office cum NST garage and staff quarters on the said land.
7. Sometime in the mid 80s, one Mr. Vilalie Seletsu started claiming right of the land acquired by the Transport Department and as such, the Chief Manager NST on 18.12.1985 and 17.07.1986 wrote complaint letters to the Deputy Commissioner, Kohima.
8. On 04.01.2002, Mr. Vilalie Seletsu again submitted a letter to the Deputy Commissioner, Kohima contending that the land acquired by the NST Department is his ancestral property. To settle the complaint of the parties, the Office of the Deputy Commissioner issued the notices dated 11.02.2002, 27.02.2002, 02.04.2002 and 01.05.2002 to all the stakeholders. A spot verification of the land was also conducted along with the parties by the Extra Assistant Commissioner, Kohima and the Report was submitted on 07.05.2002. On examining, and verifying the claims the Revenue Officer, Office of the Deputy Commissioner, Kohima ascertained that the land in question has been acquired by the Government in the year 1970 and accordingly, rejected the claims of Mr. Vilalie Seletsu.
9. Being aggrieved Mr. Vilalie Seletsu, filed a Civil Suit before the Court of Assistant to Deputy Commissioner (Judicial), Kohima, Nagaland against the State Transport Department which was registered and
BASAVARAJ Vrs INDIRA AND OTHERS
REVAJEETU BUILDERS AND DEVELOPERS Vrs NARAYANASWAMY AND SONS AND OTHERS
SAMPATH KUMAR VRS AYYAKANNU AND ANOTHER
GURBAKHSH SINGH AND OTHERS VRS BUTA SINGH AND ANOTHER
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.