Manipur High Court
Smt. Angom (N) Angomjambam (O) ... vs Smt. Angom (N) Khomdram (O) ... on 20 December, 2021
Items No. 6 - 7
KABORAM Digitally signed (Through Video Conferencing)
by
BAM KABORAMBAM
SANDEEP SANDEEP SINGH
Date: 2021.12.20
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MANIPUR
SINGH 16:39:02 +05'30' AT IMPHAL
CRP(C.R.P. Art. 227) No. 12 of 2020
Smt. Angom (N) Angomjambam (O) Memcha
Devi
....Petitioner
- Versus -
Smt. Angom (N) Khomdram (O) Sunitibala Dev & 7 Ors.
...Respondents
With
CRP (C.R.P. Art. 227) No. 46 of 2019
BEFORE
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. SANJAY KUMAR
20.12.2021
[1] The three petitioners in these two revisions, filed under Article 227 of the
Constitution, are the defendants in O.S. No. 46 of 2013 on the file of the learned Civil
Judge (Senior Division), Imphal East. The said suit was filed by the respondents in these
revisions, four in number, seeking a declaration that they along with the defendants were
entitled to 1/7th share each in the suit property and for partition of their individual shares
by metes and bounds. They also sought incidental reliefs, including mesne profits.
[2] While so, the defendants in the suit filed Judicial Misc. Case No. 419 of 2019
raising the issue of maintainability of the suit on the ground that the plaintiffs therein had
no locus standi to institute such a suit and that the suit suffered from non-joinder of a
necessary party. By order dated 07.08.2019, the Trial Court rejected the pleas of the
defendants. Aggrieved thereby, they filed CRP(C.R.P. Art. 227) No. 46 of 2019.
[3] Earlier, the plaintiffs in the suit had filed Judicial Misc. Case No.
400/2014/72 of 2019 praying for a direction to the proforma defendants, the tenants in
occupation of the suit property, to deposit the monthly rents before the Court from the
date of filing of the suit. By order dated 09.04.2019, the Trial Court accepted their plea
and directed the tenants, viz. Ashok Mahaswar, Proprietor, M/s. Sunshine Garments,
Thangal Bazar, Imphal, Manipur; and Sharabjit Singh, Proprietor, M/s. Brightways,
Thangal Bazar, Imphal; to deposit the monthly rentals payable by them for occupation of
the shops in the suit building before the Court from April, 2019 without fail and to continue
to do the same till disposal of the main case.
[4] Heard Mr. M. Devananda, learned counsel for the petitioners/defendants,
and Mr. Ajoy Pebam, learned counsel for the respondents/plaintiffs.
[5] Both the learned counsel stated in unison that the trial in the suit stood
concluded and, in fact, the erstwhile learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Imphal East,
had heard final arguments but was transferred before he had an opportunity to deliver
the judgment. They further state that they would be satisfied at this stage if the Trial
Court is directed to dispose of the main suit within a time frame, after hearing arguments.
[6] As the suit is of the year 2013 and as the trial therein has already concluded,
this Court finds merit in the proposal made by the learned counsel. It is time for the Trial
Court to give an opportunity to both sides to advance arguments and dispose of the suit
on merits and in accordance with law. This exercise can as well be undertaken through
video conferencing also.
The civil revision petitions are accordingly disposed of directing the learned
Civil Judge (Senior Division), Imphal East, to expeditiously dispose of the suit after
hearing both sides. The learned Judge is requested to do so within a period of 2 (two)
months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
In the circumstances, there shall be no order as to costs.
A copy of this order shall be supplied online or through whatsapp to the
learned counsel for the parties.
CHIEF JUSTICE
bipin
