JOHN Vs. JOSEPH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) COUNTER-PETITIONER No. 1 in M. U ,16 of 1960 on the file of the First Class Magistrate, Changanacherry has filed this revision petition against the order passed by the learned Magistrate under Sub-section 6 of Section 145 Cri. P. Code, declaring the respondents herein to be entitled to possession and restoring possession to them under the second proviso to Sub-section 4.

(2.) THE subject matter of dispute is a portion of survey No. 841/6 of Madapallypakuthy. The respondents herein presented a petition ' the Magistrate on 31-5-50 alleging that they were in possession of the property in dispute and that on 30-4-50 the counter-petitioner forcibly trespassed and occupied the property. The petition was forwarded to the police and the police submitted a report on 17-1-51. Why it was so delayed and why the respondents did not take any further steps is not known. On being satisfied that a dispute likely to cause a breach of the peace existed concerning %e land, the learned Magistrate passed 1 preliminary order Under Section 145 (1) Cripc on 27-1-51 and called upon the parlies to put in written statements of their respective claims as respects he fact of actual possession of the subject of dispute.

(3.) THOUGH the parties are not agreed about the delivery through court of the possession of the property in dispute lo the respondent Kihero is no dispute that from 30-4-50 the revision petitioner was actually in possession 01 the properity. The dispossession of thatroperty even according t0 the respondents have taken place more than two months prior to the commencement of the proceedings Under Section 145 Cripc and it is urged by the revision petitioner that he should be held to have been in possession by virtue of the second proviso to subsection W of Section 145 Cripc