evidence: The chapter focuses on the British policy of fixing territorial boundaries in the ‘frontier’ territory of Manipur. The ruler of Manipur was dependent on the British colonial state, and he accepted Treaties imposed on him by the British without a protest. It argues that two Treaties‚ i.e., Agreement regarding the Kubo Valley and Agreement regarding Compensation for the Kubo Valley‚ signed in 1834‚ were coded with ambiguities, including the term ‘agreement’ inserted in the titles. The ambiguities, compounded by lack of timely actions to settle boundary questions, by and large, contributed to disputes and contentious demands. All these became the driving factors of two different trends of restorative and defensive demands raised by Manipur in the following decades. This study contemplates that the creation of ‘scientific boundaries’ aimed at enforcing colonial ‘tranquility and peace’, which took for granted the political destiny of the ‘subjects’ who were subsequently locked into either side of a boundary line, was the fallout of the overarching framework of imperialist exigencies. [...] Joint Report of the Commissioner appointed by Government to demarcate the boundary between Burma (the Kubo Valley) and the Manipur State, as defined in the agreement of 1834. Foreign. External A. August 1896. Nos. 268–277. [...] Indo-Myanmar Border Dispute. Lok Sabha, Unstarred Question No. 1049 Answered on 24 July 2018.