Page No.# 1/7 GAHC020004052026 2026:GAU-NL:525 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) KOHIMA BENCH Case No. : C. REVN/3/2026 SHRI S. YESUMONG SANGTAM @ YESUMONG S/O LATE SASONG, PERMANENT RESIDENT OF PHELUNGRE VILLAGE, P.O. P.S. KIPHIRE, DISTRICT - KIPHIRE, NAGALAND VERSUS THE STATE OF NAGALAND AND 4 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER, NAGALAND, KOHIMA 2:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER KIPHIRE NAGALAND 3:THE EXTRA ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (LR (HQ) OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER KIPHIRE NAGALAND 4:SHRI YANGTSASE S/O LATE MURILO PERMANENT RESIDENT OF PHELUNGRE VILLAGE P.O. P.S. KIPHIRE DISTRICT - KIPHIRE NAGALAND 5:SHRI. MUJONGMONG S/O LATE THRONGTSUKHYONG PERMANENT RESIDENT OF PHELUNGRE VILLAGE. P.O. P.S. - KIPHIRE DISTRICT - KIPHIRE NAGALAN Page No.# 2/7 Advocate for the Petitioner : JOSHUA SHEQI, NAGALI SHOHE,A HUKAVI SUMI,RUBICA KIHO,TUNATO YEPTHO,YEKA SUMI,KIVITOLI SWU,KEVI KIRE,R WONCHIBENI TSANGLO,K LILY SWU,KEDI KOSO,P MHONBENI EZUNG,MIKA H AYE,CHINGMEI KONYAK Advocate for the Respondent : GOVT ADV NL, BEFORE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE YARENJUNGLA LONGKUMER ORDER Date : 01.10.2026 1. The instant petition under Article 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 read with Rule 32 of the Rules for Administration of Justice and Police in Nagaland, 1937 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules of 1937, for the sake of brevity), has been filed by the Petitioner praying for quashing and setting aside the impugned judgment dated 07.05.2026 and order dated 14.05.2026 passed by the Dobashi’s Court, Kiphire, Nagaland alleging violation of Rule 23A of the Rules of 1937 by the Extra Assistant Commissioner, Office of the Deputy Commissioner, Kiphire, Nagaland in endorsing the appeal filed by the Respondent Nos. 4 and 5 to the Dobashi’s Court, Kiphire. 2. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner, Mr. Joshua Sheqi. Also heard Mr. Moa Imchen, learned Senior Government Advocate appearing on behalf of Respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3, as well as Mr. Taka Kichu, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Respondent Nos. 4 and 5. 3. A perusal of the records reveals that there was a land dispute between the Petitioner and the Respondent Nos. 4 and 5 with regard to a property Page No.# 3/7 located at Kibrak in Tuensang road near Lihtsaoung Village. The Petitioner being aggrieved by an encroachment by the Respondent No. 4 in the month of September 2025 wrote a letter dated 28.09.2025 to the Phelungre Village Council requesting to look into the actions of the Respondent No. 4. 4. The Phelungre Village Council, vide its judgment and order dated 30.11.2025, decided that the Kibrak plot belongs to the Respondent No. 4. The Petitioner, being aggrieved, submitted an application dated 05.01.2026 before the Gaonbura’s Customary Court, Kiphire and the Gaonbura’s Customary Court heard the matter on 28.01.2026. After hearing the parties, the Gaonbura’s Customary Court of Kiphire, by order dated 28.01.2026 decided that the land at Kibrak belongs to the Petitioner. 5. The Respondent Nos. 4 and 5, on being aggrieved by the order dated 28.01.2026 passed by the Gaonbura’s Customary Court, Kiphire, filed an appeal on 13.03.2026 before the Deputy Commissioner, Kiphire, contending that the Gaonbura’s Court had failed to examine the actual customary rights and practices about the ownership of land while passing the order dated 28.01.2026. The Extra Assistant Commissioner, Office of the Deputy Commissioner, Kiphire/Respondent No. 3, vide letter dated 31.03.2026 endorsed the appeal to the Dobashi’s Court, Kiphire. The Petitioner was also served summons and upon hearing the parties, the impugned orders dated 07.05.2026 and 14.05.2026 were passed. 6. Being aggrieved by the orders dated 07.05.2026 and 14.05.2026 passed by the Dobashi’s Customary Court, Kiphire, the Petitioner is before Page No.# 4/7 this Court on the ground that under Rule 31 of the Rules of 1937, the decision passed by the Gaonbura’s Customary Court is appealable before the Deputy Commissioner or his Assistants. Therefore, the action of the Respondent No. 3 in endorsing the appeal filed by Respondent Nos. 4 and 5 to the Dobashi’s Customary Court is in violation of provisions prescribed under Rule 31 of the Rules of 1937. 7. Another ground which the learned counsel for the Petitioner has argued is that under the Rules of 1937, an appeal shall lie from the decision of Gaonbura, Dobashis or other recognized village authority only to the Deputy Commissioner or his Assistants. He submits that as per the provisions of the Rules of 1937, the Dobashi’s Court and the Village council Court has concurrent jurisdiction. Therefore, the Dobashi’s Customary Court could not sit in appeal against the decision passed by the Gaonbura’s Customary Court. And on this ground alone, the impugned judgment and order dated 07.05.2026 and the subsequent order dated 14.05.2026 are liable to be set aside on the ground of jurisdiction. 8. Countering the contentions of the Petitioner, Mr. Taka Kichu, learned counsel for Respondent Nos. 4 and 5, submits that the order passed by the Gaonbura’s Customary Court dated 28.01.2026 as well as the impugned orders 07.05.2026 and 14.05.2026 passed by the Dobashis court are both without jurisdiction. Learned counsel submits that in view of the law laid down by the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Shri Alemtemshi Jamir & 3 Ors. v. The State of Nagaland & 6 Ors. in WP(C)/164(K)/2017, the Gaonbura’s Customary court could not have entertained an appeal against the order dated 30.11.2025 passed by Page No.# 5/7 the Phelungre Village Council. Therefore, order dated 28.01.2026 passed by the Gaonbura’s Court of Kiphire Town is also bad in law. It is fairly submitted by the learned counsel for the Respondent Nos. 4 and 5 that the impugned orders dated 07.05.2026 and 14.05.2026 passed by the Dobashi’s Customary Court are also not sustainable in law. 9. Learned Senior Government Advocate, Mr. Moa Imchen, has adopted the submissions of the learned counsel for the respondent 4 and 5 and submitted that in view of the judgment of the Division Bench in Alemtemshi Jamir & 3 Ors (supra), the impugned orders dated 07.05.2026 and 14.05.2026 are liable to be set aside as they have been passed without jurisdiction. 10. The Court has duly considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and perused the materials on record. 11. The only issue to be considered by this Court in the instant case is the validity and legality of the impugned orders dated 07.05.2026 and 14.05.2026 and also the order dated 28.01.2026 on the ground of jurisdiction. 12. Rule 23A of the Rules of 1937 states: "The Dobhasis hence forward shall try and decide such civil cases only as may be referred to them by the Deputy Commissioner or Additional Deputy Commissioner or Assistant to the Deputy Commissioner as the case may be." Page No.# 6/7 At this juncture, it is relevant to refer to the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Alemtemshi Jamir (Supra) wherein the issue as to who can exercise the powers under Rule 23A of the Rules of 1937 was decided. The Division Bench in the aforementioned case, at paragraph 23 has categorically held that the Dobashi’s Court cannot be empowered as an appellate court. It was held that the power under Rule 23A and Rule 31 of the Rules of 1937 debars the Deputy Commissioner/Additional Deputy Commissioner or his Assistants to confer appellate authority upon the Dobashi’s Court. It was held by the Division Bench that the reference made by the Deputy Commissioner or his Assistants to the district Dobashi’s Customary Court in an appeal was without any authority and jurisdiction. 13. The Rules of 1937 provide that the Dobashi’s Court and the Village Court including all other courts below the Assistant to Deputy Commissioner have concurrent jurisdiction. “Rule 31: An appeal shall lie from the decision of the mauzadar, gaonbura, chief, headman of khels, dobhasis or other duly recognized village authority, to the tribal court whenever constituted or otherwise to the Deputy Commissioner or his Assistant. A record shall be made of the matter in dispute and the decision of the village authorities. If necessary, the Court shall examine the parties, and if the decision appears to be just, shall affirm and enforce it as one of its own. If the Court sees reason to doubt the justice of the decision, it will try the cases denovo, or refer it to a panchayat as above”. Page No.# 7/7 Therefore, it is evident from the language of Rule 31 that the mauzadar, gaonbura, chief, headman of khels, dobhasis or village courts, are all courts of concurrent jurisdiction below the Assistant to Deputy Commissioner. 14. In view of the clear mandate of law laid down by the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Alemtemshi Jamir (Supra) and in view of the findings arrived at hereinabove, the instant petition stands disposed of. Resultantly, the impugned orders dated 07.05.2026 and 14.05.2026 passed by the Dobashi’s court, Kiphire as well as the judgment and order dated 28.01.2026 passed by the Gaonbura’s Customary Court are quashed and set aside. 15. As a result the order passed by the Phelungre Village Council dated 30.11.2025 is the only order in force; the Petitioner is at liberty to assail the order dated 30.11.2025 before the appropriate forum if so advised. Alternatively, since the instant matter involves disputed questions of facts, if any of the parties approaches a civil court of competent jurisdiction, the period of litigation before the wrong forum shall be exempted for the purpose of limitation. 16. The petition is disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant