Page No.# 1/4 GAHC030000972022 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : RFA/11/2022 Sh Lallawmawma Aizawl VERSUS Smt Liankimi and 2 Ors. Aizawl2:Smt Lalzokimi 3:Smt Lalramnghak BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA Advocates for the appellant: Mr. F. Lalengliana, Sr. Adv. Ms. R. Vanlalhruaizeli, Adv. Advocate for the respondents: Mr. K. Laldinliana Date on which judgment is reserved : Date of pronouncement of judgment : Whether the pronouncement is of the Operative part of the judgment? : No Page No.# 2/4 Whether the full judgment has been Pronounced? : Yes ORDER 02.06.2026 Heard Mr. F. Lalengliana, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellant assisted by Ms. R. Vanlalhruazeli, learned counsel. Also heard Mr. K. Laldinliana, learned counsel for the respondents. 2. The appellant has put to challenge the impugned Order dated 09.11.2021, disposing of Review Petition No. 21/2019, by directing the parties to take further evidence and to decide the dispute, without setting aside the original Heirship Certificate No. 1066/2017, which has been issued in favor of the appellant. 3. The facts of the case in a nutshell is that the appellant is the son of the deceased K. Thanzinga. On the death of his father K. Thanzinga (L), the appellant had applied for Heirship Certificate in respect of the land, which was in the name of his father. The respondents herein are the mother and sisters of the appellant. The application for grant of Heirship Certificate in respect of the land of K. Thanzinga (L), had been allowed by the Court of Senior Civil Judge – IV, Aizawl, without any notice being issued to the respondents. As such, the mother of the appellant allegedly did not know about the case for grant of Heirship Certificate filed by the appellant before the learned Civil Court. However, the learned Civil Court passed Heirship Certificate in favor of the appellant. Page No.# 3/4 4. The Heirship Certificate was put to challenge by the respondent No. 1, who is the wife of Late K. Thanzinga, vide Review Petition No. 21/2019. The Review Petition was disposed of on 09.11.2025 as follows:- “O R D E R This is an application under Order 47 Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 for review of order passed in Heirship Case No, 1066 Of 2017 issued vide Memo. No. 43 SrCJ(A)/2017 cit. 12/7/17. The Opposite Party No. 1 had also filed his written objection. I have carefully consider all the materials on records and I am of the opinion that it is necessary to take further proceeding and collect evidence to decide the dispute between the parties. Therefore, the prayer for review is allowed. Both parties are directed to submit list of witnesses. Fix 14/2/2022 for submission of list of witnesses. Give copy to all concerned.” 5. A perusal of the impugned Order dated 09.11.2021 shows that the Review Petition has been allowed, though no grounds of review has been reflected in the said order. There is no discussion or findings made by the Review Court that grounds of review have been made out by the respondent No. 1. Further, while allowing the parties to proceed further with the case pertaining to the grant of Heirship Certificate Page No.# 4/4 relating to the land of the appellant’s father, by adducing evidence, it has not set aside the Heirship Certificate No. 1066/2017, which was under challenge in the Review case. 6. On considering the above facts, this Court finds that the impugned Order dated 09.11.2021 is not sustainable in law, for the reason that the learned Review Court has not made any finding or made any discussion that grounds for review had been made out in the Review Petition. As the present appeal is only with regard to the validity of the impugned Order dated 09.11.2021 passed in Review Petition No. 21/2019, which this Court finds unsustainable, the appeal is allowed. Consequently, the impugned Order dated 09.11.2021 passed in Review Petition No. 21/2019 is hereby set aside. The matter is remanded back to the learned Review Court, to take a fresh decision on the matter. JUDGE Comparing Assistant