SAHAVIR Vs. STATE OF U.P. AND ANR.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CASE taken up in the revised list, No one turns up to press this revision.

(2.) THE revisionist was convicted under Section 185 of the Municipalities Act and was sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 250 and in default to suffer simple imprisonment for three months vide judgment and order dated 27.4.1981 passed by the then Munsif Magistrate, Mirzapur. His appeal against the judgment and order of conviction was dismissed by the learned Sessions Judge vide judgment and order dated 24.9.1983. Both these judgments and orders of the trial court as well as appellate court are challenged by way of this revision.

(3.) IT appears that it was argued before the appellate court that the aforesaid observations made by the revisional court were without jurisdiction. The appellate court, however come to the conclusion that assuming that the Municipal Board, Mirzapur, has failed to establish that the land in question belongs to the Board, the Appellant cannot escape the liability of punishment. The Appellant was served with a notice stating that the Appellant had raised constructions without obtaining sanction or permission of the Board. The Appellant did not reply to the notice. In oral evidence all the three witnesses stated that the Appellant raised constructions without obtaining permission. On consideration of the evidence the learned appellate court came to the conclusion that the Appellant had failed to show that the constructions were made by him, after obtaining permission or sanction of the Municipal Board. Therefore, he was liable to be convicted under Section 185 of the Municipalities Act. This is a finding of fact which cannot be said to be perverse. Therefore, there is no error in the judgment of the trial court as well as of the appellate court.