KUSUTO Vs. SONIYA BAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) APPLICANT, Party No. 2, has filed this revision application challenging the order of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Sakoli, Shri M. N. Bobde, in Criminal Case No. 49 of 1972 and confirmed in Criminal Revision No. 13 of 1972 by the Additional District Magistrate, Bhandara in a proceeding under Section 145, Code of Criminal Procedure. The facts in brief are as under:

(2.) THE learned Sub-Divisional Magistrate has considered the version from the affidavit of Kusum and Soniya and simply enumerated that Kusum had filed affidavit of some nine persons without considering particular affidavits. It is further seen from the order passed by the learned Magistrate that he relied in support of the affidavit of Soniya on the entry of the record of rights and inferentially came to the conclusion that Soniya was never dispossessed and, therefore, she was in actual possession of the eastern half share of khasra No. 90. In that view, he declared that Soniya was in possession of eastern half of khasra No. 90.

(3.) FEELING aggrieved, Kusum has filed a revision application in the Court of the Additional District Magistrate Bhandara. The learned Additional District Magistrate has confirmed the order of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate mainly relying on the entries in the record of rights. In the orders of both the authorities, I do not find any discussion about the affidavits adduced by Kusum. It appears that both the authorities did not apply their minds to these affidavits. Their orders do not show that they have assessed the value of the affidavits. Feeling aggrieved, Kusum has filed this application.