MOLAN SAIKIA Vs. THE STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS matter was remanded to the D.C. for further information, because Mr. Barua for the Govt. had contended that some of the applts were not concerned with the eviction proceedings at all in other words, there were no eviction orders against them. The learned D.C. has now reported that from Encroachment Case No. 158 of 1948 -49, it appears that the applts 10, 37, 42, 47 -69 & 71 -77 are not connected with the encroachment proceedings, & that as there is no order of eviction against them, the question of appeal does not arise.

(2.) MR . Goswami concedes that if there is no order of eviction against them the question of appeal does not arise taut he states that as the learned D.C. has served notices of eviction upon them, they are entitled to appeal. The service of notices upon them, however, can be explained on the supposition that notices of eviction were sent to all persons in occupation of the lands in question without reference to the fact as to whether or not they were concerned with the encroachment proceedings. In view of the statement of the learned D.C. that there are no encroachment proceedings against these applts, namely, 10, 37, 42, 47 -69 & 71 -77, the question of their appeals does not arise.

(3.) THE 1st para of Rule 18 reads as follows: