BINOD KUMAR BAWRI Vs. WALLEY MARBANIANG

JUDGEMENT

(1.) I have heard Mr. S. Jindal, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. HS Thangkiew, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. N. Mozika, learned counsel for the respondents/defendants. This revision is against the order dated 02 -06 -2011 passed by the learned Assistant to the Deputy Commissioner, Ri -Bhoi District in Misc. Case No. 9(T) 2007.

(2.) THE petitioner herein as plaintiff filed the Title Suit for declaration that the defendants have no right to disturb the ownership and peaceful possession of the suit land belonging to plaintiff and for permanent injunction. A petition for ad -interim injunction was also filed. As the trial Court refused to grant ad -interim injunction, the petitioner challenged the order before the Court and this Court vide order dated 04 -11 -2010 directed the trial Court to hear the parties on the basis of their pleadings and other materials. Learned trial Court, after hearing both the parties, rejected the prayer for grant of ad interim injunction. The petitioner has challenged the order under Rule 36 A of the Rules for the Administration of Justice and Police in the Khasi and Jaintia Hills, 1937.

(3.) IT is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that though Rule 36A provides a remedy of appeal, this unlike 115 C.P.C., is not a bar to exercise the remedy of revision. Moreover, earlier, the respondent himself preferred revision application before this Court impugning the order passed by the Assistant to the Deputy Commissioner. In the revision filed by another plaintiff, the petitioner has not been made party. The said revision before Deputy Commissioner is not yet admitted and it may be admitted only after the delay is condoned. As such, no appeal or revision, as on date, is pending. Multiple challenges by different litigants against the same impugned order are permissible. The provisions of the Law of Limitations are not applicable under Rule 36A of the Rules. Furthermore, even if it is conceded that Law of Limitations is applicable, the petition filed by the petitioner is not barred by limitation.