MAMOTA G. SANGMA Vs. KUKILA MARAK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. P.R. Paske, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and also Mr. A.G. Momin, learned counsel appearing for the respondent.

(2.) The challenge made in this revision petition is against the order dtd. 25/4/2024 passed by the learned Assistant Judge, District Council Court, Garo Hills Autonomous District Council (GHADC) Tura, in Title Suit No.1 of 2012. The revision petition has been preferred by invoking Order 6 of the Meghalaya High Court (Jurisdiction over District Council Courts) Order 2014, read with Article 227 of the Constitution of India.

(3.) Mr. A.G. Momin, learned counsel for the respondent has questioned the maintainability of the revision petition on the ground that the impugned order is appealable under provisions of Rule 30 of the Garo Hills Autonomous District (Administration of Justice) Rules, 1953 and hence, no revision would lie in the matter. However, the submission has been countered by Mr. P.R. Paske, learned counsel for the petitioners by contending that an appeal under Rule 30 of the aforesaid Rules would have been maintainable had there been an order passed by either the Subordinate District Council Court or the Additional Subordinate District Council Court. The order which has been impugned in this petition is passed by the Assistant Judge, District Council Court and as such, no appeal is maintainable under Rule 30 of the above Rules.