Allowed

Mr. E. Zubenthung Ngullie v. Mr. Thungbemo C. Shitiri and 5 Ors.

Gauhati HC3 Aug 2023I.A.(Civil)/50/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an interlocutory application, the Gauhati High Court (Kohima Bench) examined a request for condonation of a 446-day delay in filing a connected Review Petition. The court heard submissions from counsel for the applicant, the petitioner, and the State.

What did the court decide?

The delay of 446 days in filing the connected Review Petition was condoned, and the Interlocutory Application was disposed of as allowed.

Mr. E. Zubenthung Ngullie Vs Mr. Thungbemo C… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Gauhati HC (2023)

¶1

Page No.# 1/4

¶2

GAHC020001792023

¶3

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

¶4

Case No. : I.A.(Civil)/50/2023

¶5

MR. E. ZUBENTHUNG NGULLIE AGE 34 YEARS, S/O EZANSAO NGULLIE, R/O OKOTSO VILLAGE, WOKHA - 79711, NAGALAND

¶6

VERSUS

¶7

MR. THUNGBEMO C. SHITIRI AND 5 ORS S/O CHANCHI SHITIRI, R/O PANGTI VILLAGE WOKHA,

¶8

C/O TSANSO NGULLIE STENO GR - I, DIRECTORATE OF ANIMAL HUSBANDRY AND VETERINARY SERVICES DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF NAGALAND, KOHIMA

¶9

2:THE STATE OF NAGALAND

¶10

REPRESENTED THROUGH THE CHIEF SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF NAGALAND KOHIMA

¶11

3:THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT

¶12

ANIMAL HUSBANDRY AND VETERINARY SERVICES DEPARTMENT NAGALAND KOHIMA

¶13

4:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER

WOKHA

NAGALAND

5:THE DIRECTOR

ANIMAL HUSBANDRY AND VETERINARY SERVICES DEPARTMENT

¶18

Page No.# 2/4

¶19

NAGALAND KOHIMA

¶20

6:THE CHIEF VETERINARY OFFICER

¶21

WOKHA NAGALAND

¶22

Advocate for the Petitioner : NAOMY SALE

¶23

Advocate for the Respondent :

¶24

Linked Case : Review.Pet./2/2023

¶25

MR. E. ZUBENTHUNG NGULLIE S/O EZANSAO NGULLIE

¶26

R/O OKOTSO VILLAGE WOKHA - 79711 NAGALAND

¶27

VERSUS

¶28

MR. THUNGBEMO C. SHITIRI AND 5 ORS S/O CHANCHI SHITIRI

¶29

R/O PANGTI VILLAGE WOKHA

¶30

C/O TSANSO NGULLIE STENO GR - I DIRECTORATE OF ANIMAL HUSBANDRY AND VETERINARY SERVICES DEPARTMENT GOVERNMENT OF NAGALAND KOHIMA

¶31

2:THE STATE OF NAGALAND

¶32

REPRESENTED THROUGH THE CHIEF SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF NAGALAND KOHIMA

¶33

3:THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT

¶34

ANIMAL HUSBANDRY AND VETERINARY SERVICES DEPARTMENT

¶35

Page No.# 3/4

¶36

NAGALAND KOHIMA 4:THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER WOKHA NAGALAND 5:THE DIRECTOR ANIMAL HUSBANDRY AND VETERINARY SERVICES DEPARTMENT NAGALAND KOHIMA 6:THE CHIEF VETERINARY OFFICER WOKHA NAGALAND -----------Advocate for : NAOMY SALE Advocate for : I. IMTI LONGCHAR appearing for MR. THUNGBEMO C. SHITIRI AND 5 ORS

¶37

BEFORE

¶38

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NELSON SAILO

¶39

ORDER

¶40

Date : 03-08-2023

¶41

Heard Nr. Pakinrichapbo learned counsel for the

¶42

applicant who submits that by filing this application, the applicant seeks condonation of 446 days delay in filing the connected Review Petition. The learned counsel submits that the applicant was arrayed as respondent No. 8 in the connected Review Petition i.e., WP(C) No. 115/2019 which was disposed of by this Court vide Order dated 24.03.2023. The learned counsel submits that because of reasons beyond the control of the

¶43

Page No.# 4/4 applicant, the Review Petition could not be filed in time. As such, the delay which has occasioned may be condoned. In support of his submission, the learned counsel refers to the statements made in the Interlocutory Application.

¶44

Mr. I Imti Longchar, learned counsel for the respondent No. 1/writ petitioner submits that he has no objection if the delay is condoned and that the connected Review Petition may be considered on its own merit. Mr. E Thiba Phom, learned counsel appears for the State and also submits that he has no objection if the delay is condoned.

¶45

Upon considering the statements made by the learned counsels and on perusal of the application, I am of the view that the applicant is able to make out a case for condoning the delay. Accordingly, the delay of 446 days in filing the connected Review Petition stands condoned.

¶46

I.A is disposed of as allowed.

¶47

Sd/- JUDGE

¶48

Comparing Assistant

Mr. E. Zubenthung Ngullie v. Mr. Thungbemo C. Shitiri and 5 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr. E. Zubenthung Ngullie v. Mr. Thungbemo C. Shitiri and 5 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

Zohmingthangi and 5 Ors. Vs The State of Mizoram and 4 Ors.

R. Laldinpuii and 48 Ors. Vs State of Mizoram and 4 Ors.

The Union of India and 4 Ors. Vs Sh. Lalfakawma and 56 Ors.

Smt. Lalramthari and 3 Ors. Vs Smt. Lalbiakdiki

N.Dawtlai Vs Sh R.Lalramnghaka, IAS and 2 Ors.

Union of India and 2 Ors. Vs Lallawmsiama and 4 Ors.