For the first time in the legal history of Bhutan, the High Court today came across a ‘dissenting opinion’. The four judges presiding over the case could not come to a consensus over the ownership of Thimphu’s taxi parking.
Their decisions were split. While the two judges thought the ownership of Thimphu’s taxi parking, near Bhutan Oil Distributors fuel station at Luntenzampa, should go to Tashi Commercial Corporation, the other two judges decided it should go to Thimphu Thromde.
Normally, when there is a case of dissenting opinion, the majority wins. But in this case, the judges were equally divided.
[pullquote]
Since our dissenting opinion is not binding unless the Supreme Court otherwise upheld as such; we the justices have not determined the nature of commission or omission of those officials who were involved in the illegal regularisation and also keeping in view that they were not charged by the Ministry or by the prosecution.”
Ruling of the court (dissenting opinion)
[/pullquote]
Here, they had to take the last resort, that of acting Chief Justice using his special power so that the decision be deemed majority.
The acting Chief Justice voted in favour of Tashi Commercial Corporation.
This is the fourth verdict passed in favour of Tashi Commercial Corporation. Thimphu Thromde had appealed to the High Court in November 2007, after the District Court’s verdict went in favour of Tashi Commercial.
Going by the Court’s finding Tashi Commercial Corporation owns two plots of land since 1973. The plots measuring 38.58 and 49.93 decimals were bought from the government then.
As evidence, Tashi Commercial had produced Tax receipt of 1973, transfer of ownership and ownership certificate.
[tab align=”left” width=”300px”]
Thimphu Thromde appeals to the High Court on November 7, 2007 against the District Court’s ruling
High Court passes Judgment in favour of Tashi Commercial on October 30, 2007
Former Officiating Thrompon, Ugyen Dorji, challenges the verdict and appeals to the High Court again
The then Attorney General appeals to His Majesty in August in 2008
His Majesty forwards the case to High Court as a “post constitutional case” to review the case
[/tab]
But the bone of contention arose as to the identification of the second plot. Tashi Commercial claims that the current taxi parking area was the second plot while Thimphu Thromde says it is not the case.
Thimphu Thromde say the second plot is the current areas of gas station and the then residential area of Tashi Commercial Corporation now currently used as the office for TashiCell. Thimphu Thromde say the second plot was merged during the survey carried out in 1984 with the first plot.
