Disposed¶15

Shri Tame Pupor v. Shri Pakjen Puchung

Gauhati HC15 Feb 2026CRP/12/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Tame Pupor v. Pakjen Puchung, Taku Puchung and Bojum Puchung; CRP/12/2018; Gauhati High Court, Itanagar Bench; Justice Kardak Ete; decided 16.02.2026; revision petition closed as infructuous; impugned order dated 04.04.2018 of Addl. Deputy Commissioner, Menchuka constituting Board of 6 members; settlement of land Tali-Arik, Rapum Village, Menchuka, West Siang District, Arunachal Pradesh; Kebang decision dated 22.09.2020; Board of Arbitrators decision dated 22.09.2020; related writ petition WP (C) 130 (AP) 2021; advocates R. Saikia and T. Son.

What did the court decide?

Since the matter was decided on 22.09.2020 by the Board of Arbitrators, the present revision petition has become infructuous. ¶15

Shri Tame Pupor Vs Shri Pakjen Puchung — Gauhati HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

Page No.# 1/3

¶2

GAHC040004382021

¶3

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

¶4

CRP/12/2018 SHRI TAME PUPOR Age: 0 Occupation : Address:S/O LT. CADIK PUPOR PERMANENT RESIDENT OF VILLAGE RAPUN PO/PS MECHUKA WEST SIANG DIST. AP. VERSUS SHRI PAKJEN PUCHUNG Age: 0 Occupation : Address:GAON BURA S/O LT. TINPU PUCHUNG PERMANENT RESIDENT OF VILLAGE HIRI PO/PS MECHUKA WEST SIANG DISTRICT AP. 2:SHRI TAKU PUCHUNG Age: 0 Occupation : Address:S/O LT. TAJAP PUCHUNG PERMANENT RESIDENT OF VILLAG HIRI PO/PS MECHUKA WEST SIANG DIST. AP. 3:SHRI BOJUM PUCHUNG Age: 0 Occupation : Address:S/O LT. TATIK PUCHUNG PERMANENT RESIDENT OF VILLAGE HIRI PO/PS MECHUKA WEST SIANG DIST. AP.

¶5

Page No.# 2/3

¶6

-----------Advocate for : R Bori Advocate for : MrT Son appearing for SHRI PAKJEN PUCHUNG: Advocate ,

, appearing for 2,

3, respectively.

BEFORE

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KARDAK ETE

¶11

16.02.2026

¶12

Heard Mr. R. Saikia, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. T. Son, learned counsel for all the respondents.

¶13

Challenge made in this revision petition is to the order dated 04.04.2018 passed by the Addl. Deputy Commissioner, Menchuka whereby the learned Addl. Deputy Commissioner, Menchuka had constituted a Board consisting of 6 (six) members for settlement of the land, namely, Tali-Arik, located at Rapum Village, Menchuka.

¶14

During the pendency of the revision petition by a Kebang decision dated 22.09.2020, it has been decided that there is no ground to interfere to the decision passed by the Addl. Deputy Commissioner dated 13.12.2017 which is put to challenge in WP (C) 130 (AP) 2021.

¶15

Having considered that subsequently by a decision dated 22.09.2020, matter has been decided by the Board of Arbitrators, the present revision petition has become infructuous.

¶16

Page No.# 3/3

¶17

Accordingly, the CRP stands closed on having been become

¶18

infructuous.

¶19

JUDGE

¶20

Comparing Assistant

Shri Tame Pupor v. Shri Pakjen Puchung

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shri Tame Pupor v. Shri Pakjen Puchung

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Umananda Sharma @ Indra Sharma Vs the State of Assam and 6 Ors.

Union of India and Ors. Vs Madhu Ram Das and Ors.

Harekrishna Borah Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Daniel Bechang Vs Manish Kumar Gupta

Ponga Gongo Vs The State Election Commission and 2 Ors.

Marpek Riram Vs The State of Ap and 4 Ors.