Gauhati High Court
I.A.(Civil)/135/2026 of Sh. R. Ramngaihzuala Vs Smt. Lalhmingthai on 2 September 2026
GAHC030004682026 THE GAUHATI
Page No.# 1/2
GAHC030004682026
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/135/2026
Sh. R. Ramngaihzuala
S/o Smt. Manthangi (L), R/o Electric Veng, Aizawl, Mizoram
VERSUS
Smt. Lalhmingthai
D/o Smt. Manthangi (L), R/o Electric Veng, Aizawl, Mizoram Advocate for the Petitioner : Mr. C Lalfakzuala Advocate for the Respondent : Lalremtluanga BEFORE
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KAUSHIK GOSWAMI
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
03.09.2026
Heard Mr. C. Lalfakzuala, learned counsel appearing for the applicant. Also heard Mr. Lalremtluanga, learned counsel appearing for the respondent.
2. By way of this application filed under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, read with Section 96 and Section 17(2)(b) of the Mizoram Civil Courts Act, 2005, the applicant seeks leave of this Court to prefer an appeal against the order dated 26.03.2024 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division)-V, Aizawl Judicial District, Aizawl in Heirship Certificate Application No. 335/2024.
Page No.# 2/2
3. It is the specific case of the applicant that, being aggrieved by the aforesaid order, whereby the learned trial court issued a Heirship Certificate in favour of the respondent in respect of the RCC building presently occupied by her and the floor presently occupied by Sapkhuma, covered by LSC No. Azl-448 of 1976, situated at Electric Veng, Aizawl, the connected appeal has been preferred. It is contended that the said order was passed without impleading the applicant, although the applicant claims an interest in the property in question.
4. It is further contended that the applicant is the brother of the respondent and the son of Late Manthangi, who was the owner of the property in question. Learned counsel for the applicant, Mr. C. Lalfakzuala, accordingly submits that leave may be granted, as the rights and interests of the applicant are sought to be affected by the impugned order without affording him an opportunity of being heard.
5. Mr. Lalremtluanga, learned counsel appearing for the respondent, in his usual fairness submits that he has received no instructions to oppose the prayer made in the present application.
6. Upon hearing the learned counsel for the parties and upon perusing the material available on record, this Court is of the view that the applicant has made out sufficient grounds for grant of leave to prefer the connected appeal.
7. Accordingly, leave to file the connected appeal is hereby granted, subject to the applicant satisfying this Court with regard to any application that may be required for condonation of delay, if any.
8. The present interlocutory application stands allowed. JUDGE Comparing Assistant