Page No.# 1/3 GAHC030001492023 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : RFA/6/2023 Lalfakawma Fanai S/o Late Shri Lalrivenga, Damveng, Aizawl VERSUS Lalrempuii Fanai D/o Late Shri Lalrivenga, Tanhril, MZU Road, Near 6 Miles Restaurant, Aizawl Advocate for the Appellant : Mr. Lalruatpuia Sailo Advocate for the Respondent : Mr Roshan Subedi ::: B E F O R E ::: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE NELSON SAILO Date of Hearing & Judgment : 24.02.2025 J U D G M E N T & O R D E R (Oral) Heard Mr. Lalruatpuia Sailo, learned counsel for the appellant who submits that the appellant being aggrieved with the order dated 02.11.2022 passed by the Court of Senior Civil Judge-II, Aizawl in Heirship Case No. 1815/2022 granting Heirship Certificate to the applicant/respondent in respect of LSC No. G.98 of 1986 located at Sakawrtuichhun, Aizawl has preferred the instant appeal. The learned Page No.# 2/3 counsel also submits that the appeal is also directed against the Heirship Certificate issued pursuant to the order dated 02.11.2022 to the respondent in this appeal. [2.] The learned counsel submits that the appellant and the respondent are brother and sister born to the same parent. Their mother Smt. B. Sairengpuii expired on 29.11.2017 and the respondent who is the elder sister of the appellant without informing the appellant and without taking his consent applied for Heirship Certificate for the said property, which was according issued by the learned Court below. Upon coming to learn about the same, the appellant has filed the instant appeal. The learned counsel therefore submits that since the Heirship Certificate was issued to the respondent without giving any opportunity of hearing to the appellant, the same should be set aside. [3.] Mr. Roshan Subedi, learned counsel for the respondent on the other hand submits that the Heirship Certificate was given to the respondent since there was no objection from the appellant. In fact, his “no objection” was stated in his affidavit dated 01.11.2022 and in his “No Objection Certificate” dated NIL. He therefore submits that it was on that basis that the learned Court below had granted Heirship Certificate to the respondent. [4.] The learned counsel for the appellant on the other hand submits that the appellant had never given his signature in the affidavit or in the No Objection Certificate and therefore, the appellant cannot be bound by what has been written Page No.# 3/3 in the said document. It is also submitted at the bar that there are several other similar disputes pending in the lower Court between the parties in respect of the property left behind by their mother. [5.] Upon considering the submissions made by the rival parties, this Court is of the considered view that the matter should be re-considered afresh by the learned Trial Court by giving due opportunity to the parties concerned to raise their respective claim and objection on the property in question. Accordingly, the matter is remanded back to the learned Court of Civil Judge (Senior Division) - II, Aizawl to reconsider the matter by giving due opportunities to the parties to present their case. Since the parties are represented before the Court today, they are directed to appear before the Trial Judge on 03.03.2025 where after, the learned Trial Judge shall proceed in accordance with law and come to a decision as expeditiously as possible. The impugned order dated 02.11.2022 and the resultant Heirship Certificate granted to the respondent for the property in question of the same date are hereby set aside. [6.] Appeal accordingly stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant