JOSHUA Vs. JACOB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The point raised in this Reference is whether the 1st Class Magistrate was in order in exercising his jurisdiction under S.145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and attaching the property involved in M.C. 71/51 and placing the property in the possession of a Receiver appointed by that court at a stage when a Civil Suit between the contending parties is pending. The suit is O.S. 620/50 on the file of the Adoor District Munsiff's Court. The plaintiff in that suit has prayed for a declaration that the identical property is in his possession on the strength of title. But the Civil Court has not yet given any declaration in favour of the plaintiff. If that court had itself appointed a Receiver and taken possession of the property or had issued any order restraining the defendant from disturbing plaintiff's possession, after finding that the latter case of possession is prima facie true, the Magistrate should have stayed his hands. The District Magistrate who was moved to revise that order of the 1st Class Magistrate appears to have thought that the Civil Court Receiver was already in possession of the property and it is on that basis that that he has referred the matter to this court. Since the fact that the Civil Court has appointed a Receiver was challenged before us, we called for a report from the District Munsiff. The report shows that no Receiver has been appointed by that court and the plaintiff's case of possession is only pending investigation and decision by that court. In such a situation, the Magistrate cannot keep quiet if he is satisfied that the dispute about possession is likely to result in a breach of the peace. To prevent anything like that happening, he could attach the property and place it in the hands of a Receiver. It cannot be said that in having done so, he was acting illegally or in excess of his jurisdiction. The Magistrate's order calls for no interference in revision. The Reference is answered accordingly.