AKHERAM Vs. ABDUL GANI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this petition under Sec. 482 Cr. P.C. the petitioners pray for quashing the proceedings instituted against them u/s. 145, Cr. P.C. by the non-applicants, in the Court of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Jaora, and registered as Criminal Case No. 394/145/1983, and have also prayed for quashing the orders dated 1.10.1983 and 26.10.1983, passed therein.

(2.) Proceedings before the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Jaora, relate to agricultural lands, bearing survey No. 361 and admeasuring 5 bighas and 12 biswas, situated in village Sadakhedi, Tahsil Jaora, District Ratlam. It is claimed by the petitioners that this land although recorded in the name of one Chandshah and his brothers in Bhumiswami rights in the revenue papers, yet Chandshah was the real owner and in exclusive possession of the said land having got it in pursuance to a partition with his brothers. Chand shah delivered possession to the petitioner No. 1 after receiving Rs. 301-00 from him and also executed an agreement of Adhbatai on 4.6.1961. The petitioners have been since then in possession of the land and are cultivating the same. They continued to pay the money from time to time. However, a dispute arose, which was referred to Arbitration by Panchas, who gave their award on 2.6.1976, directing Chandshah to execute a registered sale deed in favour of the petitioner No. 2 on payment of Rs. 2,500/- and this award was accepted by the parties. As Chandshah tried to avoid the directions given in the award, proceedings under Sec. 14 of the Arbitration Act, for making the award a rule of the Court, were initiated in the Court of Civil Judge, Class II, Jaora, which were registered as Civil Suit No. 44A of 1976 and is pending. An application for interim injunction under 0. 39, Rules 1 and 2 C.P.C., seeking to restrain Chandshah and his brothers, who are all defendants in the said suit, from interfering with the petitioners possession over the land was filed and by an order dated 13.5.1977, the application was allowed and injunction restraining all the defendants from interfering, directly or through anyone, with the petitioners possession over the said land was also granted. This injunction was affirmed by the District Judge in Civil Misc. Appeal No. 33 of 1977, decided on 4.7.1978.

(3.) A part of the land was sold to the non-applicants 1 and 2 by Chandshah, who executed a registered sale-deed and this is how they came into picture.