SUDHIR MANI Vs. STATE OF UTTARANCHAL AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY way of this revision, the judgment and order passed by the Additional Sessions Judge/FTC, Pauri Garhwal dated 26.6.2003 has been challenged, which was delivered in Criminal Revision no. 6/1998. In that revision, the learned Additional Sessions Judge, while setting aside the order of the Pargana Magistrate, Barahsyun, District Pauri Garhwal, directed the Magistrate to pass an order for delivering the possession of the disputed land to Surendra Mani/respondent no. 2.

(2.) THE background facts in this litigation between the parties are that the revisionist Sudhir Mani and respondent no. 2 Surendra Mani are close relatives and are from the same village. They are the descendents of the same ancestors. Revisionist and two others i.e. Birbal Mani and Amarchandi and respondent no. 2 are in possession of the land in dispute situated at Gata No. 3554. On 31.10.1991, Surendra Mani moved an application to the revenue authorities regarding forcible adverse possession, which was being made allegedly by Sudhir Mani while raising his construction. The notice was issued under Section 145 CrPC and the portion of the disputed land was attached. After enquiry, the Sub Divisional Magistrate decided the portion of the land in dispute to be in possession of Sudhir Mani, just before the passing of the preliminary order on 20.11.1991. This was based on the appreciation of the evidence adduced by both the parties before the Magistrate.

(3.) HEARD learned Counsel for the parties and perused the materials available on record.