ANDY MANGSATABAM Vs. ANNIE MANGSATABAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Assistant Survey and Settlement Officer, Imphal West-I, passed order dtd. 27/12/2005 in Mutation Case No.449/AS and SO -IW-I of 2005, accepting the plea of Annie Mangsatabam that she had acquired absolute right and title, by way of inheritance from late Mangsatabam (Ongbi) Punyabati Devi, her mother, and mutated her name in the revenue records as against the homestead land admeasuring 0.0498 hectares, covered by CS Dag No 2164 under Patta No.90/1052 equivalent to Patta No.90/158/63/503(New) of Village No.90-Thangmeiband, Imphal West District, Manipur.

(2.) Heard Mr. Th. Modhu, learned counsel for Andy Mangsatabam; Mr. Rarry Mangsatabam, appearing as a party-in-person; and Ms. I.Lenibala Devi, learned counsel, appearing for Annie Mangsatabam.

(3.) Before the Tribunal, the two brothers had claimed ignorance of the Mutation Order dtd. 27/12/2005. They pointed out that they were not made parties to the Mutation Case filed by their sister and had never received any summons from the revenue authority. They pointed out that Rarry Mangsatabam was residing at Delhi at the relevant point of time and that Andy Mangsatabam had filed objection petition dtd. 26/8/2005 before the Assistant Survey and Settlement Officer, Imphal West-I, with regard to any mutation being carried out for the subject homestead land, but despite the same, he was not put on notice by the revenue authority. They also pointed out that a notice was published by the revenue authority in a vernacular newspaper 'Thoudang', which was not widely circulated and was not read by them. They claimed that they came to know of the mutation order only when Andy Mangsatabam applied for and received a copy of the Jamabandi on 18/10/2021. They quantified the delay in filing a revision against the said mutation order as 5715 days and sought condonation on the ground that the delay was bonafide and without any negligence on their part, as they were unaware of the mutation order.