Allowed

Darka Padu Welfare Society and Anr. v. Jummo Padu and 3 Ors.

Gauhati HC4 Jan 2022CRP/18/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Gauhati High Court allowed this revision petition in which Darka Padu Welfare Society challenged village mediation decisions concerning a genealogy pillar dispute. The Court requested the parties to remit the erroneous translations and, upon concession, allowed and quashed the impugned community decisions.

What did the court decide?

The impugned purported Kebang decisions dated 27.06.2021, 10.07.2021 and 01.08.2021 are set aside and quashed.

Darka Padu Welfare Society and Anr. Vs Jummo… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Gauhati HC (2022)

¶1

Page No.# 1/11

¶2

GAHC040008552021

¶3

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) (ITANAGAR BENCH)

¶4

Case No. : CRP 18/2021

¶5

1:Darka Padu Welfare Society and Anr.

¶6

A registered society, Gaur Hill Aalo, P.O/P.S Aalo, District West Siang, Arunachal Pradesh, Represented by Shri Bindo Padu

¶7

2: Bindo Padu S/o Late Bebin Padu permanent resident of Darka Village P.O/P.S Aalo West Siang District Arunachal Pradesh

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

1:Jummo Padu and 3 Ors.

¶10

President Darka Padu/Padu Padung Opin Union Upper Unit, resident of Darka Village, P.O/P.S Aalo, District West Siang, Arunachal Pradesh

¶11

2:Lipak Padu S/o Shri Tumli Padu Secretary Darka padu Ao/Padu Padung Opin Union Upper Unit resident of Darka Village P.O/P.S Aalo District West Siang Arunachal Pradesh.

¶12

3:Jomgum Padu HGB Permanent resident of Darka Village P.O/P.S Aalo District West Siang Arunachal Pradesh.

¶13

Page No.# 2/11

¶14

4:Kemba Ete GB HGB in Charge of keba dated 27.06.2021 10.07.2021 and 01.08.2021 permanent resident of Darka Village P.O/P.S Aalo District West Siang Arunachal Pradesh

¶15

Advocate for the Petitioner : Rintu Saikia

¶16

Advocate for the Respondent : T T Tara

¶17

BEFORE

¶18

HONBLE MR. JUSTICE NANI TAGIA

¶19

ORDER

¶20

Date : 04-01-2022

¶21

Heard Mr. L. Bam, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. T. T. Tara, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 1 & 2 and Mr. G. Bam, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 3 & 4.

¶22

This Revision petition is directed against the following:-

¶23

i) Purported Kebang decision, dated 27.06.2021

¶24

(Annexure-15/page 82/ translated copy at page 86).

¶25

ii) Purported Kebang decision, dated 10.07.2021 (Annexure-17/page 90/ translated copy at page 96). iii) Purported Kebang decision, dated 01.08.2021

¶26

(Annexure-19/page 105/ translated copy at page 112-114).

¶27

Translated copies of all the impugned orders are reproduced herein below, which are as under:-

¶28

Translated copy of Keba decision dated 27.06.2021-

¶29

“On dated 27^th June 2021, a meeting was conducted at Darka

¶30

Page No.# 3/11

¶31

General Dere to discuss the genealogy dispute of Padu, estrangement and construction of two genealogy pillar pursuant to complaint filed by Shri Lipak Padu, Secretary Padu-Padung Opin Union to stop the construction of genealogy pillar. The complaint was submitted to HGB who endorsed Shri Kemba Ete pursuant to which Shri Kemba Ete convened a meeting of ETE elders and intellectuals and Keba was held under the Chairmanship of Shri Gadam Ete, Ex-MLA. The following decision was passed:

¶32

The Keba perused the Keba decision dated 30^th September 2018, submitted by Lipak Padu, Secretary, Padu-Padung Opin Union wherein at point no.3, it was directed that in genealogy pillar only Padu-Padung genealogy pillar shall be written and name of ATO KOPA shall not be written. However, the Kepa Padu group have violated the same and inscribed “Embodiment of unity and brotherhood of Kepa descendant”. Therefore, it is directed that the word “KEPA” shall be removed from genealogy pillar by Padu-Padung group.

¶33

For the welfare of Humgo-Rigo Darka village, it is decided that mediation shall be made to request the Darka Bogum Padu to discontinue the construction of their genealogy pillar till resolution of present dispute.

¶34

A meeting shall be conducted to settle the genealogy of Padu family and their welfare after inviting all the members who participated in Keba held in the year 2018 and also the elders and intellectuals of Darka Village.”

¶35

Keba members:-

¶36

Shri Gadam Ete, Ex-MLA keba Chairman.

¶37

Shri Kemba Ete, GB.

¶38

Below is the name of keba members who present at the keba:-

¶39

Shri Gadam Ete (Ex-MLA) Sd/2. Shri Tony Ete Sd/3. “ Kemba Ete (GB) Sd/-

¶40

Page No.# 4/11

¶41

4.	“ Ige Ete	Sd/-
5.	“ Dui Ete	Sd/-
6.	“ Margi Ete	Sd/-
7.	“ Mito Ete	Sd/-
8.	“ Jomya Ete
9.	“ Kirman Ete	Sd/-
10.	“ Dugjum Ete (GB)	Sd/-
11.	“ Gekar Ete (GB)	Sd/-
12.	“ Jumsor Ete (GB)	Sd/-
13.	“ Jomto Ete (GB)	Sd/-
14.	“ Marpe Ete	Sd/-
15.	“ Igo Ete	Sd/-
16.	“ Dore Ete (GPC, D-1)	Sd/-
17.	“ Kemba Ete (GPC, D-2)	Sd/-
18.	“ Jummo Ete	Sd/-
19.	“ Darge Ete	Sd/-
20.	“ Minli Ete	Sd/-
21.	“ Hampe Ete	Sd/-
22.	“ Mee Ete	Sd/-
23.	“ Jumd Ete	Sd/-
24.	“ Largo Ete	Sd/-

¶42

Translated copy:-

¶43

Keba Decision

¶44

“On 10^th day of July, 2021 a meeting of the residents of Darka was held without the involving the Padu’s of Darka. It was also attended by Gaon Burah, PRI members, elders and intellectuals at Darka General Keba House. It was held to discuss the erection of separate genealogy pillar by two groups of Padus.

¶45

This issue was deliberated by Ete’s of Darka on 27^th June, 2021 after which the (Darka Padu Welfare Society) affiliated to Padu Bogum invited Darka (Ete) Keba members for discussion on 1^st July, 2021 in the residence of Shri Domin Padu, S/O Late Kido Padu. In the discussion, they informed Darka (Ete) about the origin of Bogum and cause of dispute with the other party and in the end they requested not to mediate in the matter.

¶46

On 4^th July, 2021, the members of Padu-Padung Opin Union invited

¶47

Page No.# 5/11

¶48

Darka(Ete) in the residence of Shri Jomgum Padu. In the discussion, they informed us why they do not belong to Bogum and in the end they requested Ete party to mediate on the issue.

¶49

After hearing both the Parties, Shri Kemba Ete(GB) HGB In-charge called a meeting of all Gams, PRI members and intellectuals of Humgo Rigo to discuss the issue. The deliberation was done in the interest of the unity, village welfare and difficulty in collection of grains and wine in common gathering, kinship and intermingling and to avert law and order problem in future and for general welfare of the future generation of the village. The stand of Padu that the present dispute is their internal issue and others should not interfere as they will reunite in future is not appropriate as it is no longer their personal issue as it affects the entire village. If it is left to them to solve the issue than it will take 10 to 15 years which will be inconvenient for peaceful existence of village. Hence the following decisions are taken:

¶50

If any party violates the decision which will be taken today than as the villagers except the Padu’s will gather and discuss the issue.

¶51

In the Keba decision of 30^th September 2018 in point No. 4 it was decided that if both the parties do not amicably resolve the issue in six months than a Bogum-Boka Keba would be convened. Hence in line of that decision, a Bogum-Boka Keba shall be conducted.

¶52

It was decided by all the members present that the Padu family shall not construct any separate genealogy pillar. Therefore, the construction of genealogy pillar by Bogum group shall be stopped till Keba is conducted.

¶53

Before holding of any Keba as per point No. 2 above, the Padu families who do not consider themselves as Bogum shall not make any complaint regarding construction of pillar to the Bogum Group.”

¶54

Keba Members:

¶55

Shri Gadam Ete (Ex-MLA) (Keba chairman)

¶56

Page No.# 6/11

¶57

2. Shri Kemba Ete, GB (HGB Incharge)

¶58

Enclosed keba present member list.

¶59

DARKA VILLAGE LEVEL KEBA

¶60

On dated 10.07.2021 a village level Keba was held at Darka General Dere(Community Hall) on issue of Bogum Padu and Padu-Padung. Below is the name of Keba members who present at the Keba:-

¶61

1. Shri Gadam Ete (Ex-MLA) Chairman	Sd/-
2. Shri Kenba Ete(GB) (GB Incharge)	Sd/-
3. “ Dui Ete(GB)	Sd/-
4. “ Largo Ete (GB)	Sd/-
5. “ Jumsor Ete(GB)	Sd/-
6. “ Gekar Ete(GB)	Sd/-
7. “ Jomto Ete (GB)	Sd/-
8. “ Ige Ete (DAWS Secy.)	Sd/-
9. Smty Doyir Ete (GB)	Sd/-
10. Smt. Rebom Ete(GB)	Sd/-
11. Sri Domin Ete(Adv.)	Sd/-
12. Sri Igo Ete	Sd/-
13. ” Mormek Ete	Sd/-
14. ” Kenba Ete(GPC)	Sd/-
15. “ Mito Ete(Ex-ASM)	Sd/-
16. ” Kago Ete	Sd/-
17. ” Marpe Ete	Sd/-
18. ” Lirak Ete	Sd/-
19. ” Kirmin Ete	Sd/-
20. ” Itum Ete	Sd/-
21.” Nyoken Ete	Sd/-
22.” Bage Ete	Sd/-
23. ” Nyamin Ete	Sd/-
24. ” Gemo Ete	Sd/-
25. ” Sri Iken Ete	Sd/-
26. ” Hemmar Ete	Sd/-
27. ” Dore Ete(GPC)	Sd/-
28. ” Darge Ete	Sd/-
29. ” Dago Ete	Sd/-
30. ” Ige Ete	Sd/-
31. ” Jummo Ete	Sd/-
32. ” Molee Ete	Sd/-
33. ” Jomya Ete	Sd/-
34. ” Dumar Ete	Sd/-

¶62

Page No.# 7/11

¶63

35. ” Pegam Ete	Sd/-
36. ” Minto Ete	Sd/-
37. ” Retum Ete	Sd/-
38. ” Jumsor Ete	Sd/-
39. ” Jumd Ete	Sd/-
40. ” Tumba Ete	Sd/-
41. “ Gumpe Ete	Sd/-
42. “ Jumkar Ete	Sd/-
43. “ Dugjum Ete (GB)	Sd/-
44. “ Memin Ete (GPM)	Sd/-
45. “ Duyi Ete (J)	Sd/-
46. “ Mee Ete	Sd/-

¶64

Translated copy of Keba

¶65

“On 1^st August, 2021, excluding Padu clan, all the clan of Darka village viz. ETE, DOJI, ADO, TASO, LOLLEN, BAGRA AND RIME conducted a meeting at Humgo-Rigo Darka village for the welfare of society in Darka.

¶66

The meeting is related to descendants of Padu who have decided to go separate ways after claiming different genealogy of their forefather Padu. A faction of Padu claims their origin from Nyinyo and they have already constructed a genealogy pillar the other faction claim their origin from Bogum and they are also constructing a genealogy pillar. Therefore, this meeting was conducted by villages of Darka.

¶67

In connection with this issue, mediation was done to both the parties in the year 2017 after conducting separate meetings with them. However, the mediation could not be conclusive as the Bogum Padu group did not cooperate with the ETE volunteers.

¶68

In the year 2018, the Keyum Padu group started construction of All Padu-Padung Genealogy Pillar which was constructed in the year 2006 by descendants of Ato Kepa but which was dismantled after it fell in the right of way of Trans Arunachal Highway. However, the Bogum Padu group submitted a complaint to the HGB of Darka Village to stop the construction of the pillar. It was argued that there could be law and order problem of untold magnitude if the construction was not stopped. That

¶69

Page No.# 8/11

¶70

time, the ETE Gaon Burahs asked to stop the construction of pillar and the Keyum Padu group stopped the construction. Thereafter, meeting was conducted by the Gams, elders and intellectuals of the village for two days on 29-09-2018 and 30-09-2018.

¶71

In that meeting, both the parties were given opportunity to present their case after which the majority of the Keba members found that the pillar was in existence since the year 2006 when there was no faction or dispute and decided to allow construction of the pillar. However, it was decided that the name of Kepa, the father of Padu, shall not be mentioned or inscribed in the pillar. It was further decided that both the parties would be given 6 (six) months of time to amicably resolve their dispute.

¶72

It was decided that if the dispute can’t be resolved within 6 (six) months and if any party submits any complaint, then a Bogum-Boka Keba would be conducted.

¶73

On dated 10^th June, 2021, Shri Lipak Padu, Secretary of All PaduPadung Opin Union submitted a complaint to Shri Jomgum Padu, HGB, Darka Village. In the complaint it was stated that in Humgo-Rigo Darka Village, the Bogum Padu group are trying to construct a genealogy pillar whereas there was no Bogum in Darka and pleaded to stop the construction.

¶74

Shri Jomgum Padu, HGB Darka Village belongs to Nyinyo Padu faction. So he authorised Shri Kemba Ete, GB to conduct the Keba. Accordingly, he conducted a meeting of elders, intellectuals and PRI members excluding Padu members on 27-06-2021 in which the members requested the Bogum group to stop construction of the pillar to give them opportunity to mediate in the matter but the Bogum group did not pay any heed and continued with the construction.

¶75

On 4^th July, 2021 another complaint was submitted by Shri Jummo Padu, President, Shri Lipak Padu, Secretary and Shri Rai Padu, Joint Secretary, Padu-Padung Opin Union. In the complaint it was pleaded that

¶76

Page No.# 9/11

¶77

a Bogum Boka Keba should be convened according to the point No.4 Keba decision of 20-09-2018 and 30-09-2018. After receiving the complaint, a meeting was again conducted at Darga General Keba house on 10-07-2021 and it was decided that the Bogum Padu group shall stop the construction of Liin for giving opportunity to mediate in the matter but despite that the Bogum group are still constructing the pillar.

¶78

Today, it was decided that if the one and same descendants of Padu will construct two genealogy pillars then there will be disharmony in Humgo-Rigo Darka Village and the following decisions are passed.

¶79

In the point No.4 Keba decision of the year 2018, it was decided that if Bogum Padu grouped and the Nyinyo Padu group cannot amicably solve their case in six months then a Bogum Boka Keba shall be conducted and incompliance of the same a Bogum Boka Keba shall be conducted at a suitable date within 10-15 days.

¶80

Till the sons of Padu who are blood brothers solve their dispute amicably, neither the Bogum Padu group nor the Nyinyo Padu group are prohibited from carrying out any clan based activity in Humgo-Rigo Darka Village.

¶81

The party who violates the above and carry out any clan based activity shall be responsible for any untoward incident. “

¶82

Sd/-

¶83

Shri Gadam Ete. Ex-MLA (Keba Chariman)

¶84

Sd/-

¶85

Shri Kemba Ete, GB (Darka HGB-Incharge)

¶86

Enclosed keba member list:-

¶87

Page No.# 10/11

¶88

Copy to:

¶89

The President BAF for information and necessary action please.

¶90

The Secretary BAF for information and necessary action please.

¶91

The President BAF West Siang District Unit for information and necessary action please.

¶92

The Secretary BAF West Siang District Unit for information and necessary action please.

¶93

The President Padu-Padung Opin Union Pasighat for information and necessary action please.

¶94

The Secretary Padu-Padung Opin Union Aalo for information and necessary action please.

¶95

The President/Secretary NRDWS-Itanagar.

¶96

Though Mr. Bam, learned counsel for the petitioner has sought an adjournment for filing of rejoinder to the affidavit–in-opposition filed by the respondent Nos. 1, 2, 3 & 4, on the ground that the petitioner No. 2 is hospitalized, in view of the concession made by Mr. Tara and Mr. Bam, learned counsels representing respondent Nos. 1 & 2 and 3 & 4 respectively agreeing for setting aside of the impugned orders, this matter is taken up for disposal.

¶97

The correctness of the English translated version of the impugned orders as reproduced herein above, from the Civil Revision Petition filed by the petitioners have not been disputed by any of the parties.

¶98

In view of the concession made by Mr. Tara, learned counsel representing the respondent Nos. 1 & 2 and Mr. Bam, learned counsel representing the respondent Nos. 3 & 4 as indicated herein above, this Revision petition stands

¶99

Page No.# 11/11

¶100

allowed. Impugned purported Kebang decisions, dated 27.06.2021, 10.07.2021 and 01.08.2021, reproduced herein above, stands set aside and quashed.

¶101

The Revision Petition stands allowed and disposed of in terms of the above.

¶102

JUDGE

¶103

Comparing Assistant

Darka Padu Welfare Society and Anr. v. Jummo Padu and 3 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Darka Padu Welfare Society and Anr. v. Jummo Padu and 3 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Namjay@Namgey Tsering Vs the State of Ap

Marik Bagra Vs the State of Ap

Kirbom Dini Rigyo @ Rigio Tutu Vs the State of Ap

Tulum Korah Vs the State of Ap and Anr.

Koyor Doyom Vs the State of Ap

Mani Rangmo Vs the State of Ap and Anr.