Page No.# 1/6 GAHC030002252025 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Linked Case : I.A.(Civil)/49/2025 Sh. R. Zomawia (Now Dead) S/o Khawtinkhuma alias KT. Khuma (L) Represented by Legal Representative Smt. Lalrintluangi W/o R. Zomawia (L) R/o H/No.U-1/I Dawrpui Bara Bazar Bungkawn Aizawl Mizoram VERSUS Sh. Zosangzuala Rokhum (Now Dead) and 2 Ors. S/o Khawtinkhuma alias KT. Khuma (L) Represented by Legal Representative Smt. Lalthakimi W/o Zosangzuala Rokhum (L) R/o KT. Khuma building Dawrpui Bara Bazar Bungkawn Aizawl Mizoram 2:The Secretary Land Revenue and Settlement Department Government of Mizoram 3:The Director Land Revenue and Settlement Department Government of Mizoram Advocate for the Petitioner : Mr. Lalfakawma Page No.# 2/6 Advocate for the Respondent : Mr B Lalramenga for R1 B E F O R E HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE SHAMIMA JAHAN ORDER 05.08.2025 This is an application filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 for condonation of the delay of 535 days in preferring the Regular First Appeal against the Order dated 05.07.2023 as well as the Heirship Certificate No. 911/2023 dated 05.07.2023 passed by the Court of Senior Civil Judge-III, District Court, Aizawl. The applicant states that the land was owned by their father vide LSC No. 17/1969 and that their father expired on 14.04.1998. On 18.10.2000, a Lok Adalat meeting was held and wherein, both the parties were present i.e. the petitioner and the respondent and parties had come to an amicable settlement at the Lok Adalat that the said land under LSC No. 17/1969 were to be divided amongst the son and daughters in four parts, giving respective share to the said son and daughters. The terms of settlement as such was reached in the said Lok Adalat sitting held on 18.10.2000. 2. It is the case of the applicant that thereafter the respective parities were in occupation of their respective share since then. However, it is known to the applicant much after that on 05.07.2023, the respondent had filed Heirship Certificate application being numbered as No. 911/2023 under Section 30, sub- Section 3 of Mizo Marriage, Divorce & Inheritance of Property Act, 2014 in respect of the aforesaid LSC No. Azl-17/1969, which was in the name of their father who had passed away on 14.04.1998, as stated above. Page No.# 3/6 3. Mr. Lalfakawma, learned counsel appearing for the applicant has stated that on the same day itself i.e. on filing of the application, the learned Court allowed the said application and issued Heirship Certificate in respect of LSC No. 17/1969 in favour of the respondent namely; Sh. Zosangzuala Rokhum. The learned counsel submits that the said order was passed without any notice to the applicant as well as other brother and sisters. On the same day itself i.e. on 05.07.2023, the Heirship Certificate was also issued to the respondent by the learned Court. Since no notice was issued in respect of the said Heirship Certificate case, the applicant and others did not know about the same and only during January, 2025 when a meeting was called by the wife of the respondent, after the demise of the respondent, on 15.11.2024, they came to know about the Heirship Certificate proceeding and the certificate. The said meeting was called by the wife of the respondent to present the Will left by her husband wherein, it was stated that her husband had given the land under LSC No. 17/1969 to his own family members. 4. Mr. Lalfakawma, learned counsel states that the applicant on knowing the same, submitted representations to the concerned authorities in the Land Revenue & Settlement Department stating inter alia that after the demise of the registered owner i.e. their father on 14.04.1998 his children were allotted their share as per the L.A award dated 04.12.2000. It was also stated that as per the L.A award, the land was distributed amongst the parties and they were in occupation of the same. It was further stated to the said authorities that wife of the respondent had verbally informed them, their intention to mutate the said land under LSC No. 17/1969 in their favour, on the strength of the Will allegedly executed by the respondent. As such, a request was made to the authorities concerned not to entertain any mutation of the said land without informing Page No.# 4/6 them. It is also the case of the applicant that when he tried to pay property tax on their share of the land through online, he came to know that the entire land was in the name of the respondent. He then came to know that the said land was mutated in the name of the respondent and the Online Tax payment for the said land was already made. Aggrieved thereby, the applicant met her counsels and requested the Advocate to check if any Heirship Certificate has been issued in favour of the respondent and the Advocate after making necessary enquiry informed the applicant that the Heirship Certificate has been in fact issued in favour of the respondent, vide Order dated 05.07.2023. The applicant as such informed her Advocate to take steps for filing necessary application before the appropriate forum and thereafter, prepared the case and as such, delay of 535 days occurred, in view of the said facts. 5. Mr. Lalfakawma submits that the applicant had no knowledge of the Heirship Certificate issued in favour of the respondents and that they acquired the said knowledge only when the meeting was held in the month of January, 2025 called by the wife of the respondent. He also submits that before the online tax payment procedure, they used to pay the tax by going to the concerned office and during the said process too, they did not know that the land in respect of LSC No. 17/1969 was mutated in the name of the respondents and when they had come to know, they had immediately made representation before the concerned authority and approached the counsel for taking necessary recourse to ventilate their grievance and in the process, the delay has occurred. 6. Mr. Roshan Subedi, learned counsel appearing for the respondent had filed an objection to the said condonation application and has stated that when the Page No.# 5/6 Heirship Certificate case was filed, all the siblings knew about the same and that they all consented to it by raising no objection and as such, he had submitted that the delay in filing the instant case may not be condoned. However, Mr. Lalfakawma has submitted that in the said objection filed by the respondent, it is also reflected that on 30.01.2025, the wife of the respondent had announced that the respondent had obtained Heirship Certificate, that the same shows that the applicants had no knowledge before as could be seen from the said affidavit itself. The reason shown by the applicant in the I.A that he had no knowledge about the Heirship Certificate which was given to the respondent in the year 2023 seems to have basis. More so in view of the statement made by the respondent himself in the objection that it was in the month of January that the fact of the Heirship Certificate issued in favour of the respondent was revealed. It is also seen that during the Heirship Certificate proceeding, no notice was given to the parties concerned and as required under the law, no newspaper publication was also made. As such, it is not disbelieved that the applicants did not know about the same. 7. In view of the discussions made above, this Court deems it fit to condone the delay of the said number of 535 days in preferring the instant appeal against the Heirship Certificate and the Order dated 05.07.2023. The delay as such is condoned. The instant RFA may be taken up by this Court. 8. I.A is disposed off. JUDGE Page No.# 6/6 Comparing Assistant