JUDGMENT : BUDI HABUNG, J. Heard Mr. Tony Pertin, learned counsel for the petitioners in CRP No. 20(AP)2021, and for the respondent Nos. 1 & 2 in CRP No.42(AP)2022. Also heard Ms. Pubi Pangu, learned Government Advocate, appearing on behalf of the respondent Nos. 1 & 2; and Mr. Kamal Saxena, learned counsel for respondent No.3 and for the petitioner in CRP No. 42(AP)2022. However, none appears for the respondents No. 3 & 4 in CRP No. 42(AP)2022. 2. Both these Civil Revision Petitions, i.e., CRP No. 20(AP)2021 and CRP No. 42(AP)2022, are taken-up together for disposal as the issues involved in both petitions arise out of the same disputed land known as “Ligane Quarry Area” situated under Likabali Circle, Lower Siang District CRP No. 20(AP)2021: 3. The petitioners in CRP No.20(AP)2021 have filed this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India read with Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, seeking to set aside the ex-parte order dated 22.09.2021 passed by the Additional Deputy Commissioner-cum-Executive Magistrate, Likabali in a complaint proceeding. 4. By the said impugned order, the learned Executive Magistrate, while exercising powers under the Assam Frontier (Administration of Justice) Regulation, 1945 and purportedly under Section 15, Chapter-III of the Arunachal Pradesh Civil Courts Act, 2021, held that the land in question cannot be possessed by any individual, and that the Ligane Quarry shall remain with the Bali Taipodia Community, as reflected in Exhibits I–IV and the last sentence of the Keba decision dated 12.03.2021. 5. The case of the petitioners in CRP No.20(AP)2021, is that they have been in continuous possession of their inherited traditional fishing area called “Ligane” under Siji River, Likabali. In January 2021, two individuals allegedly encroached and extracted boulders therefrom, which lelad the petitioners to lodge a complaint before the Deputy Commissioner, Likabali on 19.01.2021. Pursuant to the complaint, a Keba(customary court) was convened on 12.03.2021, wherein it was held that the said area belonged to the petitioners’ late grandfather; however, the Keba allowed the petitioners to operate the quarry for two years only—from 01.05.2023 to 31.05.2025 without cost, upon payment of Rs 20,000, and thereafter it is specified that the area would revert to the Bali Taipodia Community. 6. Being aggrieved, the petitioners preferred an appeal before the Deputy Commissioner, Lower Siang District on 17.03.2021. 6. Being aggrieved, the petitioners preferred an appeal before the Deputy Commissioner, Lower Siang District on 17.03.2021. The appeal was disposed of by the Executive Magistrate, Likabali, by judgment dated 15.05.2021, declaring the petitioners as absolute owners of the land and directing that the same be handed over to them. The said judgment has not been challenged. 7. However, the Additional Deputy Commissioner, Likabali subsequently issued notice to the petitioners upon receiving a complaint from one Sendo Taipodia(Respondent No.3), who was not a party to the earlier proceedings. Despite the petitioners’ objection that the matter had already been adjudicated and that the ADC had no jurisdiction under the Arunachal Pradesh Civil Courts Act, 2021, the learned ADC passed the impugned ex parte order dated 22.09.2021 declaring the land as community property. 8. The petitioners have, therefore, challenged the order dated 22.09.2021, inter alia, on the following grounds: (i) That the ADC lacked jurisdiction after the Arunachal Pradesh Civil Courts Act, 2021 came into force on 12.04.2021; (ii) That under Section 27(xii) of the said Act, powers of the DC/ADC to entertain appeals under Sections 46–50 of the Assam Frontier (Administration of Justice) Regulation, 1945 were deleted; (iii) That the complaint was filed beyond the limitation period; and (iv) That the complainant was a stranger to the earlier proceedings. 9. However, the petitioners, at this stage, have fairly submitted at the Bar that they are not pressing for the other grounds, and they have submitted that since the ADC does not have the jurisdiction to entertain or decide the complaint/appeal, the matter may be remanded to the Deputy Commissioner, Likabali, to be forwarded to the competent civil court under the Arunachal Pradesh Civil Courts Act, 2021, for adjudication in accordance with law. CRP No.42(AP)2022 10. In CRP No.42(AP)2022, the petitioner, who is a member of the Taipodia Clan of Bali Village, was not a party to the earlier Keba or appeal proceedings. The case of the petitioner in this civil revision petition is that the Ligane Quarry is a traditional clan property belonging to the Taipodia Community, which is seasonally leased out to members on rent. 11. According to the petitioner, the Keba proceedings of 12.03.2021, and the subsequent appellate order dated 15.05.2021, were conducted without impleading the clan as a party respondent, and therefore, the same are void. 11. According to the petitioner, the Keba proceedings of 12.03.2021, and the subsequent appellate order dated 15.05.2021, were conducted without impleading the clan as a party respondent, and therefore, the same are void. The petitioner further contended that after the enforcement of the Arunachal Pradesh Civil Courts Act, 2021, the Executive Magistrate and the Deputy Commissioner ceased to have jurisdiction to entertain such civil disputes or appeals under the 1945 Regulation. 12. It is submitted that the orders passed by the Keba and by the Circle Officer/Executive Magistrate, Likabali, are without jurisdiction and contrary to the separation of the judiciary from the executive in the state of Arunachal Pradesh. Hence, the petitioner prays for setting aside the orders dated 26.02.2021, 12.03.2021, and 15.05.2021, and for remanding the matter to the appropriate civil Court having jurisdiction. 13. The learned counsel for the petitioner in CRP No.42(AP)2022 fully supports the submissions made in CRP No.20(AP)2021 and agrees that both matters may be remanded to the Deputy Commissioner, Likabali, for onward transmission to the competent civil court. 14. Upon hearing both learned counsel for parties and perusing the records, this Court finds that, the Arunachal Pradesh Civil Courts Act, 2021 came into force on 12.04.2021;and by virtue of Section 27(xii) of the said Act, the appellate powers of the Deputy Commissioners and Additional Deputy Commissioners under the Assam Frontier (Administration of Justice) Regulation, 1945 were repealed. It is seen that after the commencement of the Civil Court Act, all civil disputes are to be tried by the competent civil courts constituted under the said Act which has been amended from time to time. The impugned orders passed by the ADC/Executive Magistrate after 12.04.2021, are, therefore, without jurisdiction. 15. Since both matters involve complex questions of fact and ownership relating to land and community rights, and as submitted by the learned counsel for the parties, this Court deems it appropriate that the disputes be adjudicated afresh by a competent civil court having jurisdiction under the Arunachal Pradesh Civil Courts Act, 2021. 16. Accordingly, the impugned orders dated 26.02.2021, 12.03.2021, 15.05.2021, and 22.09.2021 passed by the District Land Revenue & Settlement Officer, Likabali, the Keba(Village Authority), the Circle Officer- cum-Executive Magistrate, and the Additional Deputy Commissioner-cum- Executive Magistrate, Likabali, respectively, are hereby set aside. 17. Thus, both the CRP No. 20(AP)2021 and CRP No. 42(AP)2022 are accordingly allowed to the extent as indicated above. 18. 17. Thus, both the CRP No. 20(AP)2021 and CRP No. 42(AP)2022 are accordingly allowed to the extent as indicated above. 18. The matters are remanded to the Deputy Commissioner, Likabali, who shall forward/transfer the entire case records to the competent civil court having jurisdiction for fresh adjudication in accordance with law. 19. The Deputy Commissioner shall ensure that the records are transmitted to the appropriate court within 4(four) weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. 20. The parties shall be at liberty to raise all available pleas before the competent civil court. 21. With the above observations and directions, both the civil revision petitions being CRP No.20(AP)2021 and CRP No.42(AP)2022, stand disposed of.