TIP Essential When Identity Based On Belated 'Alias' Claims; Conviction Can't Rest On Improved Witness Testimonies: Supreme Court Conviction Based On Flawed Identification Cannot Be Sustained In Law: Supreme Court Acquits Sri Lankan National In UAPA Case Penalty For Misdeclaration Of Power Capacity Is Strict Liability; No Need To Prove Intent Or 'Gaming': Supreme Court Authority To Appoint Includes Power To Dismiss; Visitor Can Terminate 'First Registrar' Under Transitional Provisions: Supreme Court State Cannot Use Delay Or Contractual Clauses To Deny Statutory Compensation For Land Acquisition: Supreme Court State As Model Employer Cannot Deny Regularization Benefits To Workers Due To Its Own Clerical Lapses: Supreme Court Section 106 Evidence Act | Husband’s Failure To Explain Wife’s Unnatural Death In Matrimonial Home Completes Chain Of Circumstances: Supreme Court Tender Condition For Out-Of-State Bidders To Submit EMD Via Demand Draft Not Mandatory If Clause Uses 'May': Supreme Court Affidavit Is Not 'Evidence' Under Section 3 Of Evidence Act Unless Court Orders Its Use Under Order XIX CPC: Supreme Court Exclusion Of Natural Heirs Not A 'Suspicious Circumstance' To Invalidate Will If Testator Provides Reason: Supreme Court 18-Year-Old Rendered 100% Disabled Entitled To Compensation For Loss Of Marriage Prospects And Dignity: Punjab & Haryana HC Right To Life Under Article 21 Prioritizes Preservation Of Mother's Life Over Reproductive Autonomy If Termination Poses Fatal Risk: J&K High Court Director’s Involvement In Company Affairs A Disputed Fact; High Court Cannot Conduct ‘Mini-Trial’ To Quash Section 138 NI Act Complaint: Punjab & Haryana HC Abuse Of Process: Bombay High Court Quashes FIRs Against Lawyer & Ex-Police Chief Sanjay Pandey; Says Complaints Motivated By Vengeance Magistrate Not Bound To Order FIR In Every Case Under Section 175(3) BNSS If Complainant Possesses All Evidence: Allahabad High Court High Court Can Initiate Suo Motu Inquiry Against Judicial Officers Based On Information; Sworn Affidavit Not Mandatory: Gujarat High Court Lack Of Videography, Independent Witnesses During Contraband Seizure Relevant Factors For Granting Bail Under NDPS Act: Delhi High Court

Main Eviction Suit Kept in Cold Storage: Meghalaya High Court Directs Expedited Disposal Amid Miscellaneous Proceedings

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a recent pronouncement on 31st October 2023, the High Court of Meghalaya, presided over by Hon’ble Mr. Justice H. S. Thangkhiew, pointed out that the main eviction suit concerning the ‘Sweety Studio’ premises at Laitumkhrah, Shillong has been “kept in cold storage” while miscellaneous proceedings were aggressively pursued by the parties involved.

The case, styled as Smti. Clara Batskhem Nonghuloo Vs. Smti. Anju R.T. Khriam, originated from an eviction suit filed back in 2019, which saw a series of miscellaneous applications and proceedings, leading to multiple orders from the lower courts. The appeal brought before the High Court was initially a Second Appeal but was converted to a Civil Revision Application upon the appellant’s request, given its origin from miscellaneous applications within the eviction suit.

The crux of the matter revolved around the restoration of electricity to the suit premises, which became a point of contention amid other issues related to tenancy and rent payment. The appellant sought to challenge the orders that were in favor of the respondent regarding the restoration of electricity and other related matters.

In its observation, the High Court noted, “A fact that cannot be ignored in this respect, is that, the respondent/defendant while aggressively contesting the Misc. Cases filed in the suit, since its institution on 11.07.2019, neglected to file her written statement, which was done only on 05.03.2021.” This delay in filing the written statement was highlighted as one of the factors contributing to the prolonged adjudication of the main eviction suit.

The Court, after examining the impugned order dated 20.05.2022 and other connected orders, directed that the “findings on the other issues, which are yet to be framed and still to be tried by the Trial Court, are to be disregarded.” It upheld the direction for the restoration of electricity to the premises, allowing the respondent to continue business operations during the pendency of the eviction suit.

Furthermore, the Court directed the Trial Court to take up the eviction suit for “expeditious disposal” and complete it preferably within a period of eighteen months from the date of receipt of records from the High Court.

This directive by the High Court aims to steer the focus back to the main eviction suit and ensure a timely resolution, setting aside the distractions caused by the miscellaneous proceedings that have prolonged the adjudication process.

Date of Decision: 31.10.2023

Smti. Clara Batskhem Nonghuloo VS Smti. Anju R.T. Khriam   

Latest Legal News