Citation : 2025 Latest Caselaw 102 Sikkim
Judgement Date : 6 November, 2025
COURT NO.1
HIGH COURT OF SIKKIM : GANGTOK
Record of Proceedings
WP(C) No. 48/2025
RUTH KARTHAK LEPCHANI AND ANR. PETITIONER (S)
VERSUS
CHEWANG DORJEE BHUTIA AND ORS. RESPONDENT (S)
For Petitioners : Ms. Gita Bista, Ms. Pratikcha Gurung and Mr.
Deepan Khatiwada, Advocates.
For Respondent No. 1 : Ms. Neha Gupta, Advocate.
For Respondent Nos. : Mr. S.K. Chettri, Government Advocate.
2 and 3
Date: 06/11/2025
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BISWANATH SOMADDER, CHIEF JUSTICE
...
JUDGMENT
This matter has a chequered history and the dispute between the
petitioners and the private respondent no. 1, has it genesis dating back to 07th
February, 1959. Several rounds of litigation have transpired between the parties
since 1980. Today, the petitioners have approached this Court in yet another
round of litigation by filing the instant writ petition seeking an order for quashing
and setting aside the impugned order dated 26th June, 2025, passed by the
Appellate Authority, Land Revenue and Disaster Management Department,
Government of Sikkim, in Revenue Appeal Case No. 01 of 2024 (Chewang Dorjee
Bhutia vs. Ruth Karthak Lepcha and Anr.). For convenience, the said order is
reproduced hereinbelow in its entirety:
"Final Order
26/06/2025
Today is the date fixed for Final Order. I have carefully heard both the parties and taken into account their submissions. I have also examined the entire records of the case along with the impugned order dated 28/08/2024 passed by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Ravangla.
COURT NO.1 HIGH COURT OF SIKKIM : GANGTOK Record of Proceedings
The instant matter is civil in nature which is beyond the jurisdiction of this appellate authority. The parties may accordingly approach the appropriate forum having jurisdiction for redressal.
This Revenue Appeal case is accordingly dismissed. The records, if any may be returned to the office of Sub Divisional Magistrate, Ravangla."
A bare perusal of the impugned order reveals that the Appellate Authority
has declined to interfere in the matter because of the fact that the same "is civil
in nature which is beyond the jurisdiction" of the Appellate Authority. This
observation -- in the opinion of this Court -- is the correct appreciation of law by
the Appellate Authority. So far as the other observation of the Appellate Authority
is concerned, which reads as ".... The parties may accordingly approach the
appropriate forum having jurisdiction for redressal. ......", this Court is of the view
that this observation is quite redundant since the rights of the parties have
already crystallised through authoritative pronouncements of Courts of
competent jurisdiction including this Hon'ble Court in various proceedings, both
civil and writ. There cannot be any need to protract litigation on the basis of the
above quoted observation of the learned Appellate Authority. Lis in perpetuity is
impermissible and a final closure of lis between the parties is inevitable in the
facts and circumstances of the instant case.
In that view of the matter, no further order is required to be passed in the
instant matter which stands disposed of accordingly.
The interlocutory applications, being I.A. No. 01/2025 and I.A. No.
02/2025, filed in connection to the main matter, stands disposed of accordingly.
(Biswanath Somadder) Chief Justice
jk/avi/ami
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!