HESILLA D. SHIRA Vs. CHEBIT CH. MOMIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Petition under Rule 6 of the Meghalaya High Court (Jurisdiction over District Council Courts) Order, 2014 read with Article 227 has been filed against the order dtd. 25/9/2019, passed by the Judge District Council Court, Tura in T.S. Appeal No. 3 of 2014.

(2.) The brief facts are that the predecessor of the petitioner, namely one (L) Herison Ch. Momin, as plaintiff had instituted a suit being T.S. No. 4 of 2007, for declaration of right, title and interest over the suit land situated at Chisrigre, P.O Garobadha, West Garo Hills, which stood in the name of the mother of the plaintiff (L) Roheni Ch. Momin which was covered by Periodic Patta No. 6, Dag No. 22. The claim of the plaintiff was that his parents having only two sons and no female issue, had adopted the grandmother of the respondent in the year 1950, who however, as per the pleadings, deserted the house of the plaintiff's parents. As such, after the death of the parents, the plaintiff had sought for mutation of the suit land before the Revenue Officer, GHADC, in his name, which however, was dismissed by order dtd. 28/6/2007. A Title Suit that is T.S. No. 4 of 2007, was then filed by the plaintiff (L) Herison Ch. Momin, the predecessor in interest of the petitioner, before the Subordinate District Council Court, Tura, which was decreed in his favour by judgment dtd. 25/2/2014, holding him to be the owner of the suit land. The defendant who is the predecessor in interest of the respondent herein, being aggrieved preferred an appeal before the Court of the Judge District Council Court, Tura, which was numbered as T.S. Appeal No. 3 of 2014. The learned Court of the Judge then by judgment dtd. 25/9/2019, which is impugned in the instant Revision Application, allowed the appeal, thereby sitting aside the order dtd. 25/2/2014 passed by the Trial Court.

(3.) Apart from other grounds that have been raised, with regard to the rights and claims of the petitioner over the suit land, and the contention that the Lower Appellate Court has not only misconstrued, but misinterpreted the practice prevailing amongst the Garos, as per customary law, the petitioner has raised a very pertinent ground with regard to the propriety of the Judge, District Council Court, Tura in taking up the appeal and passing the impugned order. This ground is based on the fact that the Judge, District Council Court, Tura who had decided the appeal, in his earlier capacity as the Revenue Officer of the Garo Autonomous District Council, had passed the order dtd. 28/6/2007, dismissing the application for mutation filed by (L) Herison Ch. Momin, the predecessor in interest of the petitioner. This to the mind of the Court before embarking on the main issues is to be examined to determine as to whether the contention as raised by the petitioner has any substance.