SHAHID Vs. LAXMI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition has been brought under Sections 397,. 401 read with Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code against the preliminary order dated May 25, 1989 made under Section 145 of the Code and subsequent order dated June 2, 1989 made under Section 146 of the Code attaching and sealing the Shop No. 73A, Khan Market, New Delhi and also against the order dated June 23, 1989 by which the application of the petitioner for quashing the proceedings was dismissed.

(2.) Facts of the case in brief are that a kalandra under Section 145 of the Code was put in on April 1, 1989 in the Court of S.D.M, New Delhi wherein petitioner was shown as Party No. I and Smt. Laxmi, Radha Krishan and Ram Swaroop were shown as Party No. 2. It was recorded in this Kalandra that the complaints of both the parties have been considered and inquiries have been made and the facts which have come out are that both the parties are disputing about the half back portion of the said shop wherein a Board of Sharma Tailors stands displayed. It was mentioned that northern portion of the said shop stood let out to one Kallu and the southern portion of the shop which has independent entrance from the side lane is in dispute. It was mentioned that this shop stands in the name of Ram Swaroop and Radha Krishan and in the portion of the shop in dispute, Mohd, Umar, father of Party No. 1 was working as,a tailor and on April, 29, 1984, a written agreement was executed between him and the owners by virtue of which he was to pay Rs. 780.00 per month to Smt. Laxmi and Radha Krishan etc. and Mobd. Uroar on the basis of that agreement carried on tailoring work in the said portion and after his death, petitioner has been carrying on tailoring work io that portion and on March 18, 1989 there took place dis- pute between the two parties and there also occurred scuffle and that Mohd. Shahid, petitioner Parly No. I has the key of the lock and the second party is thinking of removing the lock of the first party and there appears to be lot of tension between the two parties and a Kalandra under Sections 107/150 of the Code already stands filed against them and it was mentioned as there is dispute regarding the said portion of the shop, the same may be sealed till a competent Court decides the dispute. On the basis of this Kalandra, a preliminary order was made by the learned S.D.M. and subsequently the order of sealing was made.

(3.) It appears the learned S.D.M. before passing the impugned orders had not cared to go through the statement of Radha Krishan, Party No. 2 dated March 17, 1989. It is evident that if there is a dispute regarding physical possession of the immovable property which is likely to lead to apprehension of breach of peace, the provisions of Section 145 and even of Section 146 could be invoked. These provisions are not meant to be invoked to disturb the setteled physical possession of immovable property by a particular party. These provisions could come into play if a settled possession has been disturbed within two months preceding the initiation of proceedings under Section 145 of the Code.