SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

GAHC040008282019 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

(ITANAGAR BENCH)

Case No. : CRP 16/2019

1:MR. TOBANG DAMENG S/O LT. LUKIRAM DAMENG, R/O RAYANG VILLAGE, PO ROING PS ROING, LOWER DIBANG VALLEY DISTRICT, AP. MOBILE NO. 9402476722 VERSUS

1:MR. KOKEP MITKONG S/O SRI TEMGENG MITKONG, R/OMEKA VILLAGE, PO/PS ROING, LOWER DIBANG VALLEY DISTRICT, AP.

Advocate for the Petitioner : MrN Pada Advocate for the Respondent :

BEFORE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE ROBIN PHUKAN

JUDGMENT

Date : 24-09-2021 Order dated 04.03.2019, passed by the learned Deputy Commissioner, Lower Dibang Valley District, Roing in Misc case No. 01/2017/17680, is impugned in this Civil Revision Petition, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India read with Section 50 of the Assam Frontier (Administration of Justice)

Regulation Act 1945.

02. It is to be mentioned here that vide the impugned order dated 04.03.2019, the learned Deputy Commissioner, Lower Dibang Valley District, Roing has transferred Misc case No. 01/2017/17680 in respect of Shri Tobang Dameng-vs- Kokep Mitkong to the learned Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Lower Dibang Valley District, Roing for trial in view of the order dated 13.03.2018 passed by this Court in WP (C) 99 (AP) 2018.

03. Heard Mr. N. Pada, the learned counsel for the petitioner.

04. It is also to be mentioned here that the respondent side remained unrepresented here in this case. Though notice was issued to him yet he refused to receive the notice for which vide order dated 04.03.2021, this Court has decided to proceed to hear the petition ex-parte.

05. The factual background leading to filing of this Revision Petition is briefly stated as under:-

“There was a land dispute between the petitioner and the sole respondent, namely, Shri Kokep Mitkong, S/o Shri Temgeng Mitkong of Meka Village, under Roing Police Station. In connection with the said dispute, a village level kebang was held on 15.06.2007, and the Kebang decided the dispute in favour of the sole respondent.

Being aggrieved with the said decision of the Kebang, the petitioner preferred a civil appeal in the Court of Deputy Commissioner, Lower Dibang Valley District, Roing which was numbered as Misc Petition No.01/2007. Thereafter, the matter was referred to arbitration with the consent of both the parties and accordingly, the Umpire recorded the deposition of the witnesses, but thereafter, the arbitration proceeding got stalled before the arbitrator and did not proceed. The petitioner, then, preferred a representation before the Deputy Commissioner, Lower Dibang Valley District, Roing to expedite the proceeding. Thereafter, the Deputy Commissioner, Lower Dibang Valley District, Roing without deciding the issue, forwarded the same to the Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Lower Dibang Valley District, Roing, on the ground that, civil dispute are no more triable by the Deputy Commissioner in view of judgment of this court in WP (C) 99 (AP) 2018. Then, being highly aggrieved by the said order dated 04.03.2019 of the Deputy Commissioner, the petitioner preferred this Civil Revision Petition before this Court for setting aside the impugned order dated

04.03.2019, passed by the learned Deputy Commissioner, Lower Dibang Valley District, Roing in Misc case No.

01/2017/17680.”

06. Mr. Pada, the learned counsel for the revisionist submitted that in the State of Arunachal Pradesh civil cases are tried in accordance with the provision of Assam Frontier (Administration of Justice) Regulation, 1945 and as per the said Regulation, an appeal against the decision of the village Kebang is preferred before the Deputy Commissioner. But, the Deputy Commissioner instead of deciding the matter, referred the same to the learned Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Lower Dibang Valley District, Roing on the basis of the order dated 13.03.2018, passed by this Court Smti. Narah Messo-vs-State of Arunachal Pradesh & Ors, WP (C) 99 (AP) 2018. In the WP (C) 99 (AP) 2018, this Court has discussed another decision of a Division Bench in Registrar General, Gauhati High Court-vs.- Union of India and Others; reported in 2013 (4) GLT 1109.

07. It is to be mentioned here that in the case of Registrar General, Gauhati High Court-vs.-Union of India and Ors.(supra) a Division bench of this court in Para-13, 14 & 15 held as under:-

“13. We now take up the issue in relation to the

State of Arunachal Pradesh.

The Arunachal Pradesh Judicial Service Rules, 2006 have been promulgated by the State of Arunachal

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top