(1.) The controversy in this petition under Article 221 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short the Code) which is directed against order dated 5th December 1983 of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Punjabi Bagh, lifting the attachment made under Section 146(1) of the Code and dropping the proceeding under Section 145 of the Code and subsequent order dated 11th June 1984 of an AddI. Sessions Judge passed in revision petition filed by the petitioner against the aforesaid order of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate lies in a narrow compass although it has a chequered history of litigation.
(2.) The dispute between the parties relates to plot No. P-6, Uttam Nagar, measuring 200 sq. yards (for short the plot in question) which was admittedly owned by M/s. Supreme Land & House Building Society (for short the Society) of which Shri Bakshish Chand Sharma i was the treasurer. The petitioner is a milk vendor. He started his dairy business sometime in 1973. His contention is that he took (the plot in question on rent from Shri Bakshlsh Chand Sharma in his capacity as treasurer of the Society in March 1918 at Rs. 40/- per mensem and he continued in peaceful possession thereof uptil May 1982 and during the said period he, inter alia, constructed a long shed with a thatched cover and a brick-wall 11 on one side thereof and a 26 long through for p feeding the cattle numbering about 20 as he was running a milk dairy at the said place. However on 13th June 1981, one Shri P.N. Manik of Newgaon (Assam) came on the plot and demanded rent from him saying that the plot in question had been purchased by one Mrs. Prem Lata Arora of Calcutta and she was its real owner and the rent be paid to him as he was her representative. However, the petitioner refused to pay rent to Mr. Manik. He then went away but hurled the threat that d he would evict the petitioner from the plot. Later on, Shri B.C. Sharma demanded rent of the plot in question from him but the petitioner declined to pay on the ground thar his title to the plot in question was in dispute. Thereupon, Shri B.C. Sharma made an attempt to dispossess the petitioner from the plot in question by force. Paced with this situation the petitioner instituted a suit (being Suit No. 277/81) on 26th June 1981 for restraining Shri B.C. Sharma from dispossessing him from the plot in question and also for determination of the person entitled to get the rent from him. Shri B.C. Sharma filed his written statement in the said suit stating that the plot in question had been purchased by Smt. Prem Lata Arora from the Society and the sale deed to that effect had been executed by him in his capacity as treasurer of the Society on 24th May 1971. Thus he disclaimed any write or interest in or any concern with the plot in question. The order of status quo, which had been passed earlier by the civil court in the said suit, was vacated on 28th May, 1982. The said suit was still pending when this petition was filed but according to the respondent it has since been abandoned.
(3.) On 14th May 1982 Smt. Prem Lata Arora instituted a suit, being suit No. 500/82, in the civil court for permanent injunction restraining the petitioner and another from interfering with her possession over the plot in question on the ground that she was the owner in possession of the plot in question having purchased the same from the Society. The respondent filed the suit on her behalf as her attorney. An ex-parte ad-interim injunction was passed by the Subordinate Judge on 29th May 1982. Subsequently, a Local Commissioner was- appointed at the instance of the petitioner and he inspected the plot on 26th July 1982. On the strength of the report of the Local Commissioner that the plot in question was lying vacant the ad-interim injunction issued earlier was made absolute by the civil court on 21st October 1982. Feeling dissatisfied with the said order petitioner went in appeal which was heard by an Additional Senior Sub-Judge.