Cassation File No. 250459

Cassation File No. 250459

250459

• Date: Sene 28, 2016 E.C..
• Applicants: 1. W/ro Abgia Abdeta Yadesa and 2. Ato Birhanu Seifu Dinegde.
• Respondent: W/ro Senayit Tadese Alemu.
• Judges: Birhanu Amenew, Bewketu Belay, Kenea Kitata, Birhanu Mengistu, and Martha Teka.
• Summary of the Case: Following a final judgment in a boundary disturbance (possession) case, the Applicants filed for a “Review of Judgment” (dagm dagninet) under Article 6 of the Civil Procedure Code. They claimed that a subsequent administrative report from the Lemi Kura Sub-city indicated that the evidence used in the original trial was false or based on fraudulent documentation.
• Legal Rule: A review of a final judgment under Civil Procedure Code Art. 6 is an exceptional remedy reserved for cases where the decision was procured through forgery, false testimony, or criminal acts.
• Reasoning: The Division found that the administrative report merely suggested an overlap in land maps rather than proving that the original evidence was “forged” or “fraudulent” in the sense required by Art. 6. Boundary overlaps are issues of ownership and should be resolved via a separate petitory action rather than reversing a final possessory judgment.
• Ruling: The lower court’s refusal to grant a review was affirmed.