Back
2025 Supreme(Gau) 1447
2025:GAU-MZ:167
IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH
MARLI VANKUNG, J.
Smt. F. Laldingliani D/o Kapthanga (L) - Appellant
Vs.
Sh. R. Lalremruata S/o Jacob (L) - Respondent
RFA No. 37 Of 2023
Decided On : 25-07-2025
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr. J H Ramneihmawia Advocate
For the Respondent: Mr. Johny L Tochhawng, Legal Aid Counsel
The court confirmed that a Heirship Certificate application must adhere to the Mizo Act's procedural requirements, establishing the Senior Civil Judge as the proper authority for cases involving property valued above specified thresholds.
Headnote:(A) Mizo Marriage, Divorce & Inheritance of Property Act, 2014 - Section 30(3) - Civil Procedure Code, 1908 - Appeal against dismissal of Heirship Certificate Application - Court finds that the Senior Civil Judge was the appropriate forum for consideration, not a civil suit as directed by the lower court. (Paras 2-10)
(B) Authority of Senior Civil Judge - The Court determined that failure to frame issues by the Senior Civil Judge before dismissing the application was erroneous; the appropriate legal process under the Act must be followed. (Paras 5-9)
Facts of the case:
The appellant filed a Heirship Certificate Application after the demise of her mother concerning certain property. The lower court dismissed the application, stating it was not maintainable, prompting an appeal.
Findings of Court:
The application for issuance of Heirship Certificate was valid under the Mizo Act, and the case was remanded for proper consideration.
Issues: The key issue was whether the application was properly evaluated by the Senior Civil Judge.
Ratio Decidendi: The issuance of the Heirship Certificate must adhere to the procedural requirements laid out in the Mizo Act, confirming jurisdiction of the Senior Civil Judge for high-value property cases.
Result: Appeal allowed and matter remanded.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual background surrounding heirship certificate application. (Para 2 , 3) |
| 2. arguments regarding the trial court’s failure to frame issues. (Para 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. court's reasoning on the appropriateness of the senior civil judge. (Para 7 , 8) |
| 4. final decision to remand the case. (Para 9 , 10) |
JUDGEMENT :
MARLI VANKUNG, J.
Heard Mr. J.H. Ramneihmawia, learned counsel for the appellant. Also heard Mr. Johny L. Tochhawng, learned Legal Aid Counsel for the respondent.
2. This is an appeal filed under Section 17(2)(b) of the Mizoram Civil Court’s Act, 2005 r/w Section 96 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 against the impugned order dated 26.06.2023 passed by the learned Senior Civil Judge-III, Aizawl in Heirship Certificate Application No. 497/2021, wherein the learned Trial Court had dismissed the Heirship Certificate Application No. 497/2021, by finding that the petitioner was not maintainable in its present form and style and had directed the parties to approach a competent civil court and file an appropriate suit by making payment of the requisite court fees and so on.
3. Brief facts of the case is that the appellant on the demise of her mother Smt. Lalchuailovi (L) had filed the Heirship Certificate Application before the Civil Judge-III in respect of the landed property covered under LSC No. AZL-2720 of 1985 which was registered as Heirship Certificate Application No. 1069/2017. The application was contested by the respondent, and Heirship Certificate No. 1069/2017 was issued in favour of the appellant vide order dated 07.07.2017. Being aggrieved, an appeal was filed by the respondent before the Addl. District & Sessions Judge, which was registered as RFA No. 22/2017, wherein the learned Addl. District & Sessions Judge set aside the order dated 07.07.2017, passed in Heirship Certificate Application No. 1069/2017, by remanding back the case for trial denovo vide order dated 18.06.2019 in RFA No. 22/2017. The Civil Judge-III after hearing the parties passed an order dated 26.11.2019, wherein it opined that the value of the subject matter is beyond the pecuniary jurisdiction of the Civil Judge and the parties were directed to approach the appropriate forum and the Heirship Certificate Application No. 1069/2017 was returned to the appellant as per Order 7 Rule 10 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908. The appellant subsequently again submitted the Heirship Certificate Application before the Senior Civil Judge-III, Aizawl in respect of LSC No. AZL-2720 of 1985 which was left by her mother Smt. Lalchuailovi (L), which was registered as Heirship Certificate Application No. 497/2021, by making the respondent as the opposite party. A written objection/written statement was also filed by the respondent. However, after the pleadings were complete, the learned Senior Civil Judge without framing any issues, had passed the impugned order dated 26.06.2023, by stating that the parties were to approach a competent civil court and file an appropriate suit by making payment of requisite fees.
4. Mr. J.H. Ramneihmawia, learned counsel for the petitioner, aggrieved by the impugned order, submitted that the learned Senior Civil Judge had erred in not framing any issues before conducting a preliminary hearing. He further stated that the instant case is an application for issuance of Heirship Certificate under Section 30(3) of the Mizo Marriage, Divorce & Inheritance of Property Act, 2014 and accordingly, the application for issuance of Heirship Certificate is made as per the Schedule-4 of the Act. He submitted that the instant case is not a civil suit and the learned Senior Civil Judge-III had erred in directing that a civil suit should be filed. He further submitted that the appropriate forum is the court of Senior Civil Judge which has the pecuniary jurisdiction to consider the Heirship Certificate Application, wherein the mentioned LSC No. AZL 2720/1985 is valued above Rs. 10,00,000/-.
5. The learned counsel thus submitted that the impug
