Monday, May 23, 2022

‘Changkiri clan cannot be denied of their rights’

By EMN Updated: Aug 30, 2014 12:35 am


THE Deputy Commissioner Mokokchung Murohu Chotso in a notification has issued public notice in compliance with the Additional Deputy Commissioner (Judicial), Mokokchung, Nagaland, Judgment and Order dated 8th September 2006 passed in Declaratory Suit No.2 of 2005 in which the court has decreed:
“That the Plaintiffs are Changkiri clan and they cannot be denied of their rights and privilege enjoyed by other Changkiri village founding clan members. That the defendants are permanently and perpetually restrained from taking any steps and or doing any acts denying the use of clan name Changkiri by the Plaintiffs and the enjoyment of all rights and privilege at par with those of the other Changki Village founding clan members.
That the Plaintiff Imtajenba, GB, is entitled to get returned the dao and the spear forcibly taken away by Defendant No.2 and hereby direct Defendant No.2 to return the said dao and spear to the plaintiff Imtajenba, GB.
And whereas, by the subsequent Execution Orders, the Court of ADC (J) Mokokchung has directed the Deputy Commissioner, Mokokchung and the District Executive Force to execute and implement the above mentioned judgement and order dated 08-09-2006 passed in Declaratory Suit No.2 of 2005, the Defendants are hereby directed to comply with the following orders:-
That the Plaintiff are Changikiri Clan and they are entitled to all the rights and privileges inherent to Changkiri Village Founding Clan Members and nobody can deny them of such rights and privileges at par with those of the Changki Village founding Clan members and the use of the name Changkiri.
That the Defendants shall not by doing any act or taking, any actions restrain the Plaintiff from using the Clan’s name “Changkiri”. Any such restrictions imposed and any action taken in furtherance thereof against the Plaintiffs thereby denying them of their rights and privileges as Changkiri Clan have been declared null and void and therefore, have no binding on the Plaintiffs.
That the Defendant No.2 is directed to submit the dao and spear forcibly take from the Plaintiff No.1, Imtajenba, GB to the office of the undersigned within 3 days of issuance of this Order and to be returned to the rightful owner.”
Failure to implement these Orders will amount to non-compliance with the Court’s Order and will be liable for appropriate actions against the defaulting party/parties as per the provisions of law.

By EMN Updated: Aug 30, 2014 12:35:25 am