Page No.# 1/7 GAHC030001452026 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : CRP/4/2026 Smt. R. Lalsangkimi and Anr. D/o Lalbiakthangi (L) R/o Kulikawn, Aizawl 2: Sh. Zothanpui VERSUS Sh. Lalchawimawia and Anr. H/o Smt. Zonunsangi (L) H No. A-19(II) Model Veng, Sakhisih Peng, Vanap Section, Aizawl 2:Sh. C. Zoramthar Advocate for the Petitioner : Ms Dinari T Azyu Advocate for the Respondent : Mrs. Caroline K Lungawipuii for R2 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH MAZUMDAR Advocate for the petitioners : Mr. Victor L. Ralte Mr. K. Roland Ms. B. Lalramhnemi Mr. Benjamin Lalrinsanga Ms. C. Lalruatfeli Ms. H. Vanlalzami Page No.# 2/7 Advocates for the respondents : Ms. Caroline K. Lungawipuii Date on which judgment is reserved : 24.09.2026 Date of pronouncement of judgment : 24.09.2026 Whether the pronouncement is of the operative part of the judgment? : No Whether the full judgment has been pronounced ? : Yes JUDGMENT AND ORDER (Oral) Heard Mr. Victor L. Ralte, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners. Also heard Ms. Caroline K. Lungawipuii, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No. 2. 2. By the order dated 29.06.2022, this petition was required to proceed ex- parte against the respondent No. 1. 3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is aggrieved by the proceedings in RFA No. 19/2022 which culminated in the Order dated 22.11.2022 and further by the proceedings in Heirship Certificate Case No. 996/2025, which culminated in the Order dated 22.08.2025. 4. The learned counsel has submitted that the very genesis of the aforesaid Page No.# 3/7 two cases was in the Order dated 16.02.2022 passed in Heirship Certificate Case No. 175/2022, where the maternal aunt of the present petitioners was an applicant. By elaborating the facts of the case, the learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the applicant in Heirship Certificate Case No. 175/2022 had prayed for grant of an Heirship Certificate on the basis of documents submitted before the Court of the Senior Civil Judge-II Aizawl District, Aizawl. The learned Court had accordingly, on the basis of the documents submitted, without taking any evidence on the issue and without noticing that the application had been filed without arraying any of the heirs of the person who earlier held title to the land in issue, had granted the Heirship Certificate in favor of the applicant therein. The counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the respondent No. 2 in this present petition has succeeded the applicant in Heirship Certificate Case No. 175/2022, being her husband. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner has thereafter submitted that the sister of the present petitioners had preferred RFA No. 19/2022 when she came to know about the Order dated 16.02.2022, passed in Heirship Certificate Case No. 175/2022, granting heirship on the aunt of the petitioners herein. The learned counsel has submitted that the present petitioners at that point of time did not have knowledge about the orders passed in Heirship Certificate Case No. 175/2022 and their sister, who was the appellant in RFA No. 19/2022, had preferred the appeal without informing the present petitioners. 6. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that it is recorded in the Order dated 22.11.2022 that the parties to the aforesaid appeal had reached an amicable settlement and therefore, it was ordered and decreed that that the two siblings of the mother of the present petitioner would have the part Page No.# 4/7 of the property involved identified as plot No. 1, the applicant in Heirship Certificate Case No. 175/2022 would have plot No. 2, and the appellant in RFA No. 19/2022 would have plot No. 3 and the sister of the deceased mother of the petitioners herein would have plot No. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the appellant in RFA No. 19/2022, though was the sister of the present petitioners, she was at that point of time married and therefore, being a married daughter, she would not have any right of heirship to the property of her mother. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that instead of the plot No. 3 being settled in favour of the appellant in RFA No. 19/2022, the same should have devolved upon the present petitioners, who are the son and unmarried daughter of their mother and the siblings of the appellant in the RFA. 7. The learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that since their sister had not made a reference to them in the RFA, nor arrayed them as a party, they could not lay such matters before the Appellate Court, and had been, as a result thereof, deprived of their lawful heirship to the property of their predecessor. The learned counsel has submitted that in the event the petitioners herein had been given notice of the pendency of the RFA and the appellant in RFA No. 19/2022 had divulged all material facts before the Appellate Court, the petitioners would have also succeeded to the property of their mother. He has submitted that not furnishing the entire case to the Appellate Court amounts to a fraud, which can be challenged since fraud would vitiate the entire settlement arrived at by the parties to RFA No. 19/2022. 8. The learned counsel for the petitioners has thereafter submitted that the applicant in Heirship Certificate Case No. 996/2025, who has also been arrayed Page No.# 5/7 as respondent No. 1 herein had applied for heirship to the plot No. 3, to which the petitioners stake a claim and by the Order dated 22.08.2025, the heirship had also been granted to the respondent No. 1. He submits that the respondent No. 1 has not appeared before this Court despite service of notice and there is already an order to proceed ex-parte against the aforesaid respondent. 9. Ms. Caroline K. Lungawipuii, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No. 2, has submitted that they would have no objection to the matter being remanded back to the learned Addl. District & Sessions Judge-I, Aizawl Judicial District, Aizawl by setting aside the order dated 22.11.2022 and also the Order dated 22.08.2025 passed in Heirship Certificate Case No. 996/2025 and require the appropriate Court to allow the present petitioners to participate in the RFA proceedings as well as the consequential Heirship Certificate Case No. 996/2025 and thereafter, adjudicate on the RFA after giving all concerned parties a proper hearing. 10. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in the event the orders passed in RFA No. 19/2022 are interfered with by this Court and the matter is remanded back, allowing them to participate and place their case before the learned Court, the petitioners' grievances could be redressed for the time being. 11. I have heard the learned counsels for the parties. I have also perused the documents placed on record, and I have also perused the Trial Court Records received. 12. The grievance raised by the petitioners herein regarding their lack of Page No.# 6/7 opportunity to participate in the RFA 19/2022, which had been initiated by their married sister (now deceased), appears to be genuine, since in the absence of any objection by the respondent No. 2 and in the total absence of any response from the respondent No. 1, it appears that the petitioners would also have a claim to the share of their mother in LSC No. 130/1978. I am also of the considered opinion that the Heirship Certificate Case No. 996/2025 would require an interference at this stage, since the same can only be decided after the claim of the petitioner regarding their share of heirship in LSC No. 130/1978 is adjudicated by the Court of the learned Addl. District & Sessions Judge-I, Aizawl Judicial District, Aizawl by re-opening RFA No. 19/2022. 13. Accordingly, the Order dated 22.11.2022 passed in RFA No. 19/2022 and the Order dated 22.08.2025 passed in Heirship Certificate Case No. 996/2025 are accordingly interfered with. RFA No. 19/2022 is now remanded back to the Court of the learned Addl. District & Sessions Judge-I, Aizawl Judicial District, Aizawl to adjudicate afresh by allowing the present petitioners, namely Smt. R. Lalsangkimi and Sh. Zothanpuia to be impleaded as party respondents to the aforesaid RFA on their filing the requisite applications for the same. 14. It has been brought to our notice that the appellant in RFA No. 19/2022 has already expired and the present respondent No. 1 has succeeded her as her legal heir. Accordingly, it is further directed that the appellant in RFA No. 19/2022 shall now be substituted by the respondent No. 1 in the present petition, in the event an appropriate application is filed either by the respondent No. 1 or by the present petitioners herein bringing to the notice of the Court that the appellant in RFA No. 19/2022 has expired and that the present respondent No. 1 in this petition has claimed to be the husband and legal heir of Page No.# 7/7 the appellant in RFA No. 19/2022. This arrangement has been directed to speed up the trial proceedings and would not affect in any manner any right which may be vested in any of the parties. On their appearance in the RFA No. 19/2022, the petitioners shall file affidavits before the Appellate Court bringing on record all the legal heirs who may have an interest in LSC No. 130/1978 to enable the learned Trial Court to appropriately adjudicate the matter in accordance with law. 15. It is made clear that the orders passed in Heirship Certificate No. 996/2025 dated 22.08.2025, having been set aside, the legal heirs who would have claimed the property covered by LSC No. 130/1978 would be at liberty to pray for respective Heirship Certificates claiming their own share of property. 16. CRP No. 4/2026 accordingly disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant