Page No.# 1/5 GAHC030002912025 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/77/2025 Sh. John Hmangaiha and 3 Ors. S/o Zamanthanga (L), R/o Venghnuai, Aizawl 2: Smt. H. Lalsiampuii 3: Sh. Zirduha 4: Sh. CH. Zamvel VERSUS Sh. V.L. Huapzauva (L) R/b Smt. Varrozingi and 9 Ors. D/o Rualkhuma (L), R/o Upper Republic, Aizawl, Mizoram 2:Sh. Laldika (L) R/b Smt. Lalramliani 3:Smt. Thangveli (L) R/b Smt. Lalneihi 4:Sh. Rualkhuma (L) R/b Smt. Varrozingi 5:Sh. Laldawngliana 6:The State of Mizoram 7:The Secretary to the Government of Mizoram Page No.# 2/5 8:The Director 9:The Settlement Officer 10:The Assistant Settlement Office Advocate for the Petitioner : Mr C Lalramzauva Sr. Adv. Advocate for the Respondent : Mr. J.H. Ricky Lalruatfela for R1-R5 BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MARLI VANKUNG ORDER Date : 30-05-2025 Heard Mr. C. Lalramzauva, learned senior counsel for the applicant/appellant assisted by Mr. J. Malsawmzuala Vanchhawng, learned counsel. 2. This is an application filed under Order 1 Rule 10(2) r/w Section 151 CPC for impleadment of Smt. Jubilee E. Chuauhang as respondent No. 5 A in the connected RFA No. 1/2025 and in IA(Civil) No. 76/2025. 3. Mr. C. Lalramzauva, learned senior counsel submits that the said Smt. Jubilee E. Chuauhang is a necessary party in the RFA No. 1/2025 and I.A.(Civil) No. 76/2025, on the grounds that the property in dispute has been purchased by her from respondent No. 5 and an application for grant of interim injunction under Order 39 Rule 1(a) r/w Section 151 CPC has been filed in I.A.(Civil) No. 76/2025 against Smt. Jubilee E. Chuauhang on the ground that Smt. Jubilee E. Chuauhang is making construction over the disputed property. 4. The learned senior counsel also submitted that unless she is impleaded as a party in RFA No. 1/2025 and also made a party in I.A.(Civil) No. 76/2025, the Page No.# 3/5 court cannot pass an effective order in the application under Order 39 Rule 1(a) r/w Section 151 CPC against the said Smt. Jubilee E. Chuauhang. He submits that making Smt. Jubilee E. Chuauhang a party in the connected RFA No. 1/2025 and also in the connected I.A.(Civil) No. 76/2025 is necessary for the proper adjudication of the matter. He further submitted that the respondent Nos. 1 to 5 had been representing Smt. Jubilee E. Chuauhang before the Trial Court in Civil Suit No. 40/2014 even when Smt. Jubilee E. Chuauhang had purchased the disputed landed property from the respondent No. 5, however, since Smt. Jubilee E. Chuauhang is now making the construction over the disputed landed property, she needs to be impleaded in I.A.(Civil) No. 76/2025 and the connected RFA No. 1/2025. 5. Mr. J.H. Ricky Lalruatfela, learned counsel for the respondents/opposite party Nos. 1 to 5 submits that the present application is not maintainable in its present form and style and therefore is liable to be dismissed. He submits that the application is made under Order 1 Rule 10(2) r/w Section 151 of CPC, wherein the court may add a party if it appears to be court, to be just and proper, to enable the court effectually and completely to adjudicate upon and settle all the questions involved in the suit. He submits that it would not be appropriate to implead a new party at this appellate stage when the said Smt. Jubilee E. Chuauhang was not made a party before the learned Trial Court in Civil Suit No. 40/2014. 6. The learned counsel further submitted that the applicant herein had raised a number of grounds for setting aside the impugned judgment and order in the RFA. However, none of the grounds specified the necessity of impleadment of the proposed new party i.e., Smt. Jubilee E. Chuauhang and there is a total Page No.# 4/5 absence of questions which may be involved with the proposed new party in the appeal. He further submitted that the respondent Nos. 1, 3 & 5 have no legitimate interest in the appeal, since the respondent No. 1 LSC No. 626 of 2005 was already purchased by Hiphei even before the filing of the original suit and the same was mutated in his name. That the respondent opposite party No. 5 also has no interest in the case as the LSC No. 625 of 2005 was already mutated in the name of Smt. Jubilee E. Chuauhang. He therefore submits that considering the above facts, the mere impleadment of Smt. Jubilee E. Chuauhang as one of the respondent in the main appeal would have no fault in the appeal. 7. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsels for both the parties. 8. It is seen that in the main RFA No. 1/2025, the claim of the appellants is with regards to the ownership of the landed property covered by LSC No. 628 of 2005. It is also admitted by both the parties that the said landed property is purchased by Smt. Jubilee E. Chuauhang, who is at present said to be making construction over the said disputed property. It is also seen that the interlocutory application registered as I.A.(Civil) No. 76/2025 is filed under Order 39 Rule 1(a) r/w Section 151 CPC seeking a direction that the said Smt. Jubilee E. Chuauhang should not continue construction of the house building within the land which is in dispute. 9. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, this court finds that the connected I.A.(Civil) No. 76/2025 cannot be made effective without the impleadment of Smt. Jubilee E. Chuauhang and further since the disputed property has been purchased by Smt. Jubilee E. Chuauhang, this court finds Page No.# 5/5 that the said Smt. Jubilee E. Chuauhang is a necessary party for the proper consideration of RFA No. 1/2025 and I.A.(Civil) No. 76/2025. 10. Accordingly, this court find it fit to allow the impleadment of Smt. Jubilee E. Chuauhang as respondent No. 5A in the RFA No. 1/2025 and subsequently be impleaded as respondent No. 1 in I.A.(Civil) No. 76/2025, by invoking Section 151 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (as amended from time to time). 11. I.A.(Civil) No. 77/2025 thus stands allowed and disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant