Gauhati High Court
IA(C)/210/2025 of Kompu Dolo Vs Hayeng Mangfi on 14 June 2026
GAHC040014062025 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) (ITANAGAR BENCH) Case No. : IA(C)/210/2025 Kompu Dolo Son of Late Tagung Rebe, resident of Village Rebe, PO and PS Chayang Tajo, East Kameng District, Arunachal Pradesh. 790192 VERSUS Hayeng
Page No.# 1/2
GAHC040014062025
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
(ITANAGAR BENCH)
Case No. : IA(C)/210/2025
Kompu Dolo Son of Late Tagung Rebe, resident of Village Rebe, PO and PS Chayang Tajo, East Kameng District, Arunachal Pradesh. 790192
VERSUS
Hayeng Mangfi Son of Late Tangu Mangfi, resident of Nari Camp Village, PO Sawa, PS Chayang Tajo, East Kameng District, Arunachal Pradesh. 790102
Advocate for the Petitioner : Takar Bagang, Advocate for the Respondent : Mudang Opo, Linked Case : Election Pet./1/2024
Kompu Dolo
Age: 62
Occupation :
Address:Son of Late Tagung Rebe
resident of Village Rebe
PO and PS Chayang Tajo
East Kameng District
Arunachal Pradesh 790102
VERSUS
Hayeng Mangfi
Age: 48Occupation :
Address:Son of Late Tangu Mangfi
resident of Nari Camp Village
PO Sawa PS Chayang Tajo
East Kameng District
Arunachal Pradesh 790102
------------
Advocate for : Minki Boje
Advocate for : D Mazumdar Sr. Advocate
Page No.# 2/2
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BUDI HABUNG
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
Date : 115.06.2026
Heard Mr. Takar Bagang, learned counsel for the applicant/election petitioner. Also heard Mr. Mudang Opo, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Opposite Party/returned candidate.
It is submitted that the prayer made in this interlocutory application has been already allowed and the witnesses have been called for and some of having already been examined; this interlocutory application has become infructuous. Therefore, the learned counsel for the applicant prays for disposal of this interlocutory application.
In view of the above submission and as the purpose of filing the interlocutory application has been served, this interlocutory application stands disposed of.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant