Thokchommadhuraja Singh vs Thokchomakensingh

[1] I heard Mr. N. Ibotombi, learned senior counsel for the petitioner. This Civil Revision Petition has been taken up for hearing and for disposal.

[2] The respondents No.1 to 6 in the Revenue Revision Case No. 3 of 2020 on the file of the Ld. Presiding Officer Revenue Tribunal, Bishnupur,

Manipur is the Civil Revision petitioners before this Court challenging the order dated No.3.02.2020 in which the learned Presiding Officer Revenue

Tribunal, Bishnupur has granted an order of interim stay the impugned order dated 17.01.2020 passed in MUT. Case No. 25/SDC/Bishnupur of 2020

on the file of the learned Sub-Deputy Collector, Bishnupur.

[3] The case of the petitioners is that these petitioners were filedaoriginal civil suit in OS No. 43 of 1990 before the erstwhile Subordinate Judge,

Manipur West, against the father of the respondent No.1, the respondent No.2 and others praying for (i) decree for declaration of the petitioner’s

title over the (a) Agricultural land under new patta No. 36 /141 (new) B.T covered by Dag No. 93 comprising an area of 2.70 acres corresponding to

old Patta No.154 situate at Toubul Village under Bishnupur District. (b) Agricultural land under new patta No.36/139 B.T covered by Dag No.2

comprising an area of 1.94 acres corresponding to old Patta No.57 situate at Toubul Village under Bishnupur District and (c) Agricultural land under

patta No.36/142 (new) B.T covered by Dag No. 96 comprising an area of .68 acres corresponding in old patta No.205 situate at Toubul Village under

Bishnupur District, Manipur.

(ii) a decree of possession by evicting the defendant Nos. 1 to 3 i.e. one ShriThokchomMegha Singh s/o (L) Lalji Singh, ShriThokchomJiten Singh

father of the present respondent No.1 and the respondent No.2 from the said lands and delivery of khas possession to the petitioners.

(iii) a decree for cancellation of the entries of the names of the defendants Nos. 1 to 3 i.e. one ShriThokchom Mega Singh s/o late Lalji Singh,

ShriThokchomJiten Singh father of the present respondent No.1 and the respondent No.2 from the suit lands.

[4] It is the further case of the petitioners that the erstwhile Subordinate Judge, Manipur West passed a judgment and order dated 24.03.1995 in

Original Suit No.43 of 1990, thereby declaring that the petitioners are the owner of the said land and for eviction of the defendants Nos. 1 to 3 i.e.

ShriThokchomMegha Singh s/o late Lalji Singh, ShriThokchomJiten Singh father of the present respondent No.1 and the respondent No.2 herein and

their agents from suit-land and delivered the possession of the suit-land to the petitioners/plaintiffs. Thereafter, the petitioners have taken physical

possession of the said suit-land without any objection.

[5] After the decree in the said suit in OS No. 43 of 1990 dated 24.03.1995, the petitioners were approached the Ld. Sub- Divisional Officer,

Bishnupur by filing Misc Case No.1 of 2003 and based on that petition filed by the petitioners, the Ld. SDO, Bishnupur passed an order on 02.01.2003

thereby allowing to correct the land record in the light of the judgment and order dated 24.03.1995 passed by the erstwhile Subordinate Judge, Manipur

West in Original Suit No. 43 of 1990.

[6] Later on, the said ShriThokchomMeghasingh andShriThokchomJiten Singh the father of the present respondent No.1 and the respondent No.2

were filed Revenue Revision Case No. 32 of 2008 before the Revenue Tribunal, Manipur challenging the order dated 02.06.2003 alleged to have been

passed by the learned Sub-Divisional Officer, Bishnupur in Misc Case No.1 of 2003. On consideration of their cases, the Ld. Presiding Officer,

Revenue Tribunal, Manipur vide order dated 30.06.2008 stayed the operation of the order dated 02.06.2003 passed in Misc Case No.1 of 2003 on the

file of the Ld.SDO, Bishnupur.

[7] After obtaining the said order of interim stay dated 30.06.2008,ShriThokchomMegha Singh filed an application in MiscCase No. 65/SDC/Bpr of

2010 before the learned SDO, Bishnupur by stating that as the Ld. Presiding Officer, Revenue Tribunal, Manipur has stayed the operation of the order

dated 02.06.2003 passed by the SDO, Bishnupur in Misc Case No. 1 of 2003 and necessary correction be made and kept in abeyance till the disposal

of the case. Thereafter, the learned SDC, Bishnupur passed an order dated 30.3.2010 thereby declaring all the recorded statement of the said

pattaw.e.f the date of the order as null and void.

[8] It is the further case of the petitioners is that the Revenue Revision Case No.32 of 2008 filed by Th. Megha Singh and his parties was dismissed

for default by the learned Revenue Tribunal vide order dated 01.09.2015. Thereafter, the petitioners were filed a Rev. Appeal Case No. 4 of 2018

before the learned SDO, Bishnupur by challenging the order dated 30.3.2010 passed by the SDC in Misc Case No.65 of 2010 and thereafter, the

learned SDO, Bishnupur vide order dated 08.08.2018 came to the conclusion that the order dated 30.3.2010 has no effect. Thereafter, the petitioners

have filedMisc Case No. 173 of 2018 before the Ld. SDC, Bishnupur for correction of land records and the Ld. SDC, directed the Circle Mandol to

rectify the land records vide order dated 13.09.2018. Challenging the said order dated 08.08.2018 passed by the learned SDO, Bishnupur by filing

Revenue Revision Case No. 18 of 2018 before the Ld. Presiding Officer, Revenue Tribunal, Bishnupur and the Ld. Presiding Officer, Revenue

Tribunal, Bishnupur passed an ex-parte interim order dated 27.08.2018 thereby staying the order dated 08.08.2018. Later on, the said Revenue

Revision Case No.18 of 2018 filed by ShriThokchomMegha Singh was dismissed for default. Thereby vacating the interim stay order vide order dated

05.11.2018.

[9] It is the further case of the petitioners that pursuant to the order dated 05.11.2018, the learned Deputy Commissioner, Bishnupur,by order dated

24.11.2018 passed an order thereby permitting the learned Sub-Deputy Collector, Bishnupur to review the order dated 13.09.2018 passed in Rev. Misc

Case No.173 of 2018 by following the Rules. However, the learned Sub-Deputy Collector, Bishnupur without following the due process of law passed

an order dated 03.12.2018 in Revenue Misc Case No.214 of 2018 thereby declaring the order dated 13.09.2018 passed in Misc Case No. 173 of 2018

as null and void and the land records be rectified according to the order dated 30.03.2010 passed in the Misc Case No. 65 of 2010.

[10] It is the further case of the petitioners thatthe petitioner challenged the order dated 03.12.2018 passed in Revenue Misc Case No. 214 of 2018 by

way of filing Rev.Appeal No. 1 of 2019 before the learned SDO, Bishnupur and the learned Sub-Divisional Officers, Bishnupur after hearing the

parties vide order dated 06.12.2019 set aside the order dated 03.12.2018. Thereafter, the petitioners have filed Mutation Case No. 25 of 2020 before

the Ld. Sub-Deputy Collector, Bishnupur for correction of land records and the learned SDC, in compliance of the order dated 06.12.2019 passed in

Revenue Appeal Case No. 1 of 2019 directed the Circle Mandol for necessary correction of the land records vide order dated 17.1.2020.

[11] Though the order has been passed on 17.1.2020 but these respondents in this Civil Revision petition have filed a Revenue Appeal No.1 of 2019 by

challenging the order dated 06.12.2019 by filing Revenue Revision case No.4 of 2020 before the learned Presiding Officer, Revenue Tribunal,

Bishnupur and without issuing any stay order, the learned Presiding Officer, Revenue Tribunal, Bishnupur was issued a notice on 28.02.2020 to these

petitioners.

[12] It is also the further case of the petitioners that these respondents in this Civil Revision petition also challenged the order dated 17.1.2020 passed

in Mutation Case No.25 of 2020 before the Ld. Presiding Officer, Revenue Tribunal, Bishnupur by way of filing the Revenue Revision Case No.3 of

2020 and the learned Presiding Officer, Revenue Tribunal, Bishnupur without considering the materials on record granted an interim order dated

03.2.2020 thereby staying the operation of the order dated 17.01.2020. The learned Senior Advocate had pointed out for granting interim stay order no

reason has been given by the Presiding Officer.

[13] Challenging the said order dated 03.02.2020, the present Civilrevision petition has been filed before this Court by the petitioners.

[14] It is the case of the petitioners that the learned Presiding Officer, Revenue Tribunal, Bishnupur without considering the judgment and decree

dated 24.03.1995 in OS No. 43 of 1990 in which the Civil Court has declared that these petitioners are the owners of the land in question and also

eviction of the defendants Nos. 1 to 3 and delivered the possession of the suit land to the petitioners/plaintiffs. It is case of the petitioners that pursuant

to the decree dated 24.03.1995, the petitioners have taken the physical possession of the suit land without any objection. But without considering the

said decree and the subsequent order passed by the authorities concerned, the learned Presiding Officers, Revenue Tribunal, Bishnupur has stayed the

impugned order dated 17.01.2020 which is total non application of mind on the main ground that the order dated 06.12.2019 passed by the learned Sub-

Divisional Officer, Bishnupur thereby setting aside the order dated 03.12.2018 allowing to enter the name of the respondents by rectifying the earlier

order has not been stayed by the Revenue Tribunal in Revenue Revision Case No. 4 of 2020 and only notice has been ordered.

[15] Mr. N. Ibotombi, the learned senior counsel for the petitioners also pointed out that when the respondents have challenged the order dated

06.12.2019 passed by the learned Sub- Divisional Officer, Bishnupur in Rev. Appeal No.1 of 2019 by filing Revenue Revision Case No. 4 of 2020, the

learned Presiding Officer, Revenue Tribunal, Bishnupur has not granted any interim order except to ordered notice but the very same Presiding

Officer, Revenue Tribunal has simply admitted the subsequent case in Revenue Revision Case No. 3 of 2020 bygranting interim order staying the

operation of order dated 17.1.2020 is total non application of mind and against the principle of natural justice.

[16] By pointing out the other points, Mr. N. Ibotombi, learned senior counsel for the petitioners has represented before this Court that the Civil

Revision petition may be admitted and an order of interim stay may be granted to stay the operation of order in Revenue Revision Case No. 3 of 2020

dated 03.02.2020.

[17] I heard Mr. N. Ibotombi, learned senior counsel for the petitioners. When the matter is taken up for admission, this Court has considered all the

arguments made by the learned senior counsel for the petitionersMr. N. Ibotombi and this Court inclined to dispose the CRP in the admission stage

itself.

[18] Admittedly, the learned Presiding Officer, Revenue Tribunal while entertaining the Revenue Revision Case No. 4 of 2020, no interim order was

granted whereas in present Revenue Revision Case No. 3 of 2020 challenging the subsequent order dated 17.01.2020 grantedthe interim stay order,

which is not admissible in law.

[19] While entertaining the Revenue Revision Case No.4 of 2020, it is the bounden duty of the learned Presiding Officer, Revenue Tribunal, Bishnupur

to consider both the case in Revenue Revision Case No. 3 of 2020 and the Revenue Revision Case No.4 of 2020 altogether and to pass appropriate

orders in both but without doing so had simply granted the interim order in Revenue Revision Case No. 3of 2020 dated 03.02.2020 and issued notice in

Revenue Revision Case No.4 of 2020 dated 28.02.2020.

[20] Admittedly, the parties are approaching the Civil court and the Revenue Authority right from 1990 i.e. more than 30 years both the parties are

approaching the civil Court and the Revenue authorities concerned for ventilating their grievances. If the cases are allowed to proceed further in

normal course, definitely it will take several decades. Therefore, without going into the merits and demerits of the case of the petitioners and the

respondents, I am inclined to issue suitable direction to dispose both the cases pending before the learned Presiding Officer, Revenue Tribunal,

Bishnupur which will give ends of justice to both the parties.

[21] Admittedly, the Revenue Revision Case No.3 of 2020 which is the subject matter of this present Civil Revision Petition and the Revenue Revision

Case No.4 of 2020 challenging the order dated 06.12.2019 by the respondents are pending before the learned Presiding Officer, Revenue Tribunal,

Bishnupur. Therefore, to give aquitous to this issue pending for years together i.e. for several decades between the petitioners and the respondents, I

am inclined to dispose the Civil Revision petition at the admission stage itself by giving appropriate direction to the learned Presiding Officer, Revenue

Tribunal, Bishnupur to dispose both the cases within a time framed manner.

[22] Accordingly,

(a) This Revision petition is disposed of.

(b) the learned Presiding Officer, Revenue Tribunal, Bishnupur is hereby directed to dispose the Revenue Revision Case No.3 of 2020 and Revenue

Revision Case No.4 of 2020 by hearing both the parties by way of issuing appropriate notices and their appearances and dispose the same within a

period of 1(one) month from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

(c) Both the parties are hereby directed to cooperate for the early disposal of both the cases in Revenue Revision Case No. 3 of 2020 and Revenue

Revision Case No. 4 of 2020 pending on the file of the learned Presiding Officer, Revenue Tribunal, Bishnupur.

(d) the learned Presiding Officer, Revenue Tribunal, Bishnupur is hereby directed to give personal hearing of these cases by giving fair opportunity to

both parties and dispose of the same withina stipulated period of time without giving any adjournments to either parties.