BHOOPATSINGH KHOOBSINGH Vs. ANRATHSINGH KHOOBSINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision is directed against an order of the Sessions Court whereby in proceedings Under Sections 145/146, Criminal Procedure Code, the Sessions Court has in supersession of the order of the S. D. M. directed the order of attachment and appointment of Receiver to be restored while the learned Magistrate had directed the proceedings to be dropped.

(2.) THE facts are little complicated and need to be noticed with care. For the sake of convenience Bhoopatsingh and Gumansingh, the two brothers and petitioners herein, shall be referred to as 'party No. 1 and Anrathsingh and Phool Bai, the husband and wife, non-petitioners Nos. 1 and 2 herein, shall be referred to as 'party No. 2' as they were before the original Court.

(3.) THE property in dispute consists of agricultural land. It appears that the land is recorded in the revenue papers in the name of Vinodsingh and Hukumsingh both minors. Their father Anratsingh, purporting to act as their guardian, transferred the said land by way of sale to Party No. 1. The two minors acting through their mother seem to have filed a civil suit for setting aside the sale and they succeeded in securing an ex parte decree in that C. D. S. No. 346-A/84. Party No. 2 initiated proceedings Under Order 9, Rule 13, Civil Procedure Code for setting aside the ex parte, decree. These proceedings are registered as M. J. C. No. 10/87. Therein they moved an application on 21-8-1987, complaining that the opponents in disguise of the ex parte decree were attempting at taking over possession of the suit property and also trying to alienate the same. By order dated 28-10-1987, the Civil Court directed that the implementation of the ex parte decree shall remain stayed for a period of two months, within which period the parties shall have the M. J. C. proceedings concluded.