Page No.# 1/4 GAHC030006882024 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : RFA/41/2024 R. Vanlalmuanpuia E-18 TBL Bhavan Khatla Aizawl Mizoram VERSUS R. Malsawmtluanga E-18 TBL Bhavan Khatla Aizawl Mizoram Advocate for the Petitioner : Mr A.R. Malhotra Advocate for the Respondent : Mr B Lalramenga Page No.# 2/4 ORDER B E F O R E HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE NELSON SAILO 28.01.2025 In view of the Order passed today in I.A(Civil) No. 185/2024, this appeal is taken up for consideration. Heard Mr. A.R. Malhotra, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. B. Lalramenga, learned counsel for the sole respondent. [2.] By filing this instant appeal, the appellant has challenged the Order dated 30.10.2023 passed by the Civil Judge (Senior Division) - II, Aizawl in Heirship Certificate Case No. 1308/2023 whereby, Heirship Certificate has been granted to the respondent in respect of the properties mentioned in the said Order. Mr. A.R. Malhotra, learned counsel at the outset submits that prior to issuance of the Heirship Certificate, no notice was issued to the appellant or any other interested person and likewise, no newspaper publication was made inviting objections from any quarter. Such being the position, the appellant was unaware about the Heirship Certificate granted to the respondent but as soon as he learned about the same, he has filed the instant appeal. [3.] The learned counsel submits that the appellant being the grandson of the deceased and in whose name the properties have been mutated has every right Page No.# 3/4 to claim the properties in question and in fact, the appellant has a better claim than the respondent, who is the son of the deceased person. He therefore submits that since the appellant was not given any opportunity to make his objection and claim on the properties in question, the impugned Heirship Certificate and the Order passed by the learned Court below should be set aside. [4.] Mr. B. Lalramenga, learned counsel for the sole respondent submits that in so far as the stand of the appellant that he has a better claim to the properties in question is only doubtful since the respondent is the son of the deceased person whereas, the appellant is the grandson. He however submits that considering the claim made by the appellant and the fact that notice was not issued or newspaper publication not made on the claim for Heirship Certificate, Court may pass appropriate orders as it deems fit and proper. [5.] Considering the above submissions and perusal of the materials available on record and importantly, having regard to the fact that prior to issuance of the Heirship Certificate, the interested persons have not been heard including the appellant and therefore, this Court is of the considered view that the matter should be reconsidered by the learned Court below by giving due opportunity to the parties to make their respective claim on the properties in question. Page No.# 4/4 [6.] Accordingly, the impugned Order dated 30.10.2023 is hereby set aside and the matter remanded back to the Court of Civil Judge (Senior Division) - II, Aizawl for reconsidering the Heirship Certificate application afresh. Since the parties are represented before this Court today, they are directed to appear before the Court of Civil Judge (Senior Division) - II, Aizawl on 18.02.2025. Upon their appearance, the learned Court below shall proceed with the matter in accordance with law and make an endeavor to dispose of the Heirship Certificate application as expeditiously as possible by giving due opportunities to all parties interested in the properties. [7.] With the above observations and directions, the appeal stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant