CRP (CRP Art. 227) No. 44 of 2016, Judl. Misc. Case No. 254 of 2015 and Original Suit No. 63 of 2014. Case: Andy Mangsatabam Vs Thangjam Shyamkishore Singh and Ors.. Manipur High Court
| Case Number | CRP (CRP Art. 227) No. 44 of 2016, Judl. Misc. Case No. 254 of 2015 and Original Suit No. 63 of 2014 |
| Counsel | For Appellant: M. Rarry, Advocate |
| Judges | Kh. Nobin Singh, J. |
| Issue | Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) - Order XII Rules 1, 2, 3, 4, 6; Order XV Rule 1; Section 151 |
| Judgement Date | February 20, 2017 |
| Court | Manipur High Court |
Judgment:
Kh. Nobin Singh, J.
-
Heard Shri M. Rarry, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. None is present for the respondents.
-
Being aggrieved by the impugned order dated 22-02-2016 passed by the Learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Imphal West in Judl. Misc. Case No. 254 of 2015, the petitioner has filed the instant Civil Revision Petition challenging its legality and correctness.
3.1 According to the petitioner, he purchased a piece of land measuring 0.24 acre under Patta No. 78/614(Old)/200(New) corresponding to C.S. Dag No. 1247 by way of a registered Sale-Deed executed on 12-06-2013 and consequent upon the mutation order being passed by the concerned Revenue Officials, a Jamabandi was issued in his favour. In order to develop the said land, the petitioner started construction of the boundary wall and while the work of construction was going on, the respondents started raising objections including a threat being laid on the petitioner and his employees with direct consequences which compelled the petitioner to file a suit being O.S. No. 63 of 2014 for declaration and permanent injunction before the Ld. Civil Judge, Senior Division, Imphal West on 18-11-2014 and in response thereto, the respondents filed a Written Statement-cum-Counter Claim dated 19-12-2014 wherein the respondents admitted that the petitioner is the owner of the said land by way of transferring of ownership through a Sale-Deed and out of the total area of 0.24 acre, an area of 0.1561 acre remains in the hands of the petitioner after the acquisition of 0.0839 acre having been made by the Government.
3.2 The petitioner filed an application being Judl. Misc. Case No. 254 of 2015 under Order XII Rule 6 read with Order XV Rule 1 of the CPC praying for pronouncement of a judgment in view of the admissions made by the respondents in their pleadings and for drawing up a decree thereof and in response thereto, the respondents filed a reply on 06-05-2015 raising objections to the prayer sought for by the petitioner. After having heard the learned counsels appearing for the parties, the Ld. Civil Judge, Senior Division, Imphal West dismissed the said Juld. Misc. Case No. 254 of 2015 and being aggrieved by the said judgment and order, the instant Civil Revision Petition has been filed by the petitioner on the inter-alia grounds that the Ld. Civil Judge had committed error of law and procedural irregularity when it failed to consider the admissions made by the respondents and its judgment and order, impugned herein, is contrary to the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in a catena of decisions.
-
In the plaint filed by the petitioner, it is averred that the petitioner had acquired the suit land measuring 0.24 acre by way of a registered Sale-Deed executed on 12-06-2013 and consequent upon the registration of the Sale-Deed, a mutation order was passed by the concerned Revenue Officials whereby the name of the petitioner was recorded as the Pattadar and a Jamabandi was issued in his favour. The relevant para 5(a), 6 and 7 are reproduced herein-below:
5(a) C.S. Dag No. 1247, by way of a duly registered Sale-Deed executed on 12-06-2013 being registered in Book No. 1, Volume No. 11 of 2013, Page No. 267/273 being No. 2037.
6. That, consequent upon the registration of the Sale-Deed, the Mutation Order has been passed by the concerned Revenue Officials in the Land Records where the name of the Plaintiff has been recorded as recorded pattadar in respect of the 3 (three) homestead land as mentioned- above.
7. That, the concerned Revenue Authorities have accordingly issued 3 (three) separate Jamabandis/Pattas and Dag-Chithas in favour of...
To continue reading
Request your trial