ZAMPUII Vs. STATE OF MIZORAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Mr. A.R. Malhotra, learned counsel appearing for the appellant as well as Mr. Aldrin Lallawmzuala, learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos. 1 to 4 and Mr. L.H. Lianhrima, learned counsel appearing for respondent No. 5.

(2.) THE appellant/plaintiff had applied for a plot of land situated at Chanmari West in the year 1989. After due verification, the appellant was alloted the plot of land measuring about 302.50 Sq. metre vide House Pass No. 539 of 1989 by the Revenue Department. Thereafter, the appellant took possession of the land and constructed the building in the year 1989 as per the terms and conditions of the House Pass. On application by the appellant, Land Settlement Certificate No. AZL.394 of 1990 was issued to the appellant by converting the said house pass. The appellant has been paying tax and other necessary fees in respect of the said land and she has also cleared all the taxes dues upto 2001 -2002.

(3.) WHILE matters rest thus, the plaintiff received a letter dated 03.04.1996 issued by the ASO -I addressed to Shri H. Zabiaka, S/R -III stating that Smt. Lalmalsawmi(respondent No. 5) had submitted a letter stating that her land covered under LSC No. 3126 of 1985 is overlapping with the land of the plaintiff covered under LSC No. AZL. 394 of 1990 and that the surveyor was directed to make spot verification. After spot verification, the appellant did not receive any communication from the Revenue Department untill she received the show cause notice dated 29.06.1998 stating as to why the LSC should not be transferred and the building be demolished. On receipt of the show cause notice, the appellant submitted a reply stating that she has constructed a building in 1989 and the respondent No. 5 had not done anything to show that the land belongs to her and, therefore, she requested the ASO -I to give an alternative side to the respondent No. 5. However, the Assistant Settlement Officer -I issued an order dated 19.06.2010 informing the appellant that as the house pass and LSC of respondent No. 5 is senior, the respondent No. 5 shall have the land and the appellant shall be provided an alternative land and the cost of the building will be borne by the respondent No. 5.