Smti Omoty Tabing v. Yomkar Riba and 5 Ors

ORDER Date : 04-12-2024 Heard Mr. M. Biswas, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. B. Kaushik, learned counsel for all the respondents.

¶2The petitioners by way of instituting the present petition have assailed an order dated 27.09.2024 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Sr.Divn), Pasighat in IA No.02/2024 (in TS No.24/2021).

¶3The petitioners, who are the defendants in TS No.24/2021, had along with their written statements filed documents No. A to M. The Petitioners herein, thereafter instituted IA No. 02/2024 (in TS No. 24/2024) before the Trial Court invoking the provisions of Order XIII Rule 10 of the Civil Procedure Code praying for calling of the original records, basically pertaining to the documents marked as A to M for Page No.# 4/6 proving the same.

¶4The trial court upon considering the matter, vide order dated

27.09.2024, proceeded to reject the prayer so made by the petitioners herein. The learned trial court for the purpose of rejecting IA No.02/2024, recorded the following conclusions; "Heard both Id. counsels, I have perused the application which shows that the prayer under order 13 Rule 10 CPC has been made by the applicants/defendants for documents No.A to M which has been annexed in the WS. The respondents/Plaintiff in their objection have not disputed the credibility of any of these documents, their main contention is that the suit land in Documents No. A to M which pertain to the records in Civil Dispute No-HT-23/88/99/200-2001 and the order passed by Honorable High court affirming the decision of the Learned DC, Pasighat is for the land situated at 2 Mile area, Pasighat and it is nowhere connected to the preset disputed land which is located at 3 Mile area. Furthermore, it appears pertinent to take note that the documents No-F to M of the WS are the judgments of the Ld. DC, Pasighat and the honorable Gauhati High Court in CRP No 08(AP)/2002 and CRP No. 09(AP) 2002 which are certified copies and in all these decisions, the kebang of 21.08.1987, 09.03.2000 and

15.01.2001 (Documents No-A,B and D respectively) are already mentioned. In fact, the CRP No-08(AP)/2002 (Document No F of the WS) was a result of the Order passed by the DC, Pasighat on 20.03.2021 in HT-23/98/99/2000-20001 (Document No-E herein). As all these documents No. A to M are official records of decisions passed by the village authority, the DC, Pasighat and the honorable High Court, certified copies of these documents are admissible u/s 76 of the Indian Evidence Act which are already annexed in the WS. This court does not see any need to call for the original documents. These official records being public documents, certified copies of these documents. Thus, for reasons aforesaid, the prayer of the applicants in IA No-02/24 is Page No.# 5/6 rejected and disposed of."

Being aggrieved the petitioners have instituted the present revision petition.

¶5Mr. M. Biswas, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. B. Kaushik, learned counsel for the respondents have advanced their respective submissions.

¶6However, on being queried by this Court with regard to the conclusion drawn by the learned Trial Court in the order dated

27.09.2024, Mr. B. Kaushik, learned counsel for the respondents, herein, has submitted that the objection of the respondents, herein, is with regard to the prayer of the petitioners, herein, to call for the original records for the purpose of proving documents marked as A to M as submitted by the petitioner herein, along with their written statement as filed in TS No.24/2021. Mr. B. Kaushik, has fairly submitted that the respondents, herein, would have no objection if the petitioners exhibits and relies upon the said documents marked as A to M, during the trial of TS No.24/2021 inasmuch as certified copies of the said documents have already been brought on record by the petitioners, herein, in TS No.24/2021.

¶7Mr. M. Biswas, learned counsel for the petitioners, in view of the categorical submission made by the respondents, herein, that they would not object to the petitioners, herein, in exhibiting and relying Page No.# 6/6 upon the said defendant's documents marked as A to M during the trial of TS No.24/2021, submits that the petitioners, herein, would not insist for calling of the original records pertaining to the defendant's documents marked as A to M.

¶8In view of the above consensus reached between the parties, no further adjudication of the issue arising in the present proceeding would be called for.

¶9Accordingly, the present revision petition is disposed of in terms of the consensus as arrived at between the parties in the matter, and noticed herein above.

JUDGE Comparing Assistant

Page No.# 1/6 GAHC040015532024 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) (ITANAGAR BENCH) Case No. : CRP/51/2024 Smti Omoty Tabing Wife of Late Okong Tabing, resident of Village Upper Baskota, Pasighat, East Siang District, Arunachal Pradesh 791102 2: Kaling Tabing Age: Son of Late Okong Tabing resident of Village Upper Baskota Pasighat Arunachal Pradesh 791102 3: Jacob Tabing Age: Son of Late Okong Tabing resident of Village Upper Baskota Pasighat Arunachal Pradesh 791102 4: Togram Tabing Age: Son of Late Okong Tabing resident of Village Upper Baskota Pasighat Arunachal Pradesh 791102 5: Miss Ome Tabing Age: Daughter of Late Okong Tabing Page No.# 2/6 resident of Village Upper Baskota Pasighat Arunachal Pradesh 79110 VERSUS Yomkar Riba and 5 Ors Son of Late Karyom Riba, resident of Polo Colony Naharlagun, PO and PS Naharlagun, Papum Pare District, Arunachal Pradesh 791110 2:Tumge Likam Tamin Age: 0 Son of Late Tatum Gadi resident of Namey Village PO and PS Nari Lower Siang District Arunachal Pradesh. 791102 3:Dr Yater Darang Age: 0 Wife of Shri Tapi Darang resident of Mirbuk PO and PS Pasighat Arunachal Pradesh 791102 4:Mrs Rossina Kena Darang Age: 0 Wife of Shri Bittem Darang resident of Village Mirbuk PO and PS Pasighat Arunachal Pradesh. 791102 5:Duyin Dai Age: 0 Son of Tagom Dai resident of Ballek PO and PS Pasighat Arunachal Pradesh 791102 6:Legal Heirs of Late Tarung Tanning Age: 0 Page No.# 3/6 a. Smti Inyo Perme Wife of Late Tarung Tanning b. Asenggale Tanning Daughter of Late Tarung Tanning. both are resident of Village Mirbuk PO and PS Pasighat Arunachal Pradesh 79110 Advocate for the Petitioner : M Biswas, G J Saikia Advocate for the Respondent : Tapi Omo, P Bora,Bedanta Kaushik BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. UNNI KRISHNAN NAIR