KAPPA PUTTANNA NINGAIAH Vs. M S SREEMAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition is directed against the order of the First Class magistrate Bamanagaram dated 24th April 1967 made in Criminal Mis. case No. 77 of 1966 on the file of his Court. By that order the Magistrate held that the respondent was in possession of the disputed land at the time of the attachment and prior thereto.

(2.) The main grievance of the Advocate of the petitioner is that although the Magistrate has referred to the affidavits filed on behalf of the petitioner, he has neither considered nor discus, sad the same. According to him, deponents in four affidavits filed on behalf of the petitioner were cultivators of adjacent lauds and the Magistrate has not given any reason for discarding their evidence.

(3.) It has been fairly conceded on behalf of the respondent, I think rightly, that the Magistrate has not given his reasons for arriving at the conclusion with regard to the possession of the disputed land. However it is argued by the learned Advocate for the respondent that it cannot be said on the basis of the order made by the Magistrate, that he has not considered or applies his mind to the affidavits that had been filed in the case on behalf of the parties. It was submitted that on behalf of the respondent also affidavits have been filed by the cultivators of the neighbouring lands, and after a perusal of the affidavits filed on behalf of the parties the Magistrate has come to the conclusion that the petitioner was not in possession of the disputed land. It was contended that in these circumstances this Court should not disturb the finding arrived at by the Magistrate.