INDRARAJ SINGH Vs. PUBAYA LAL SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision is against an order dated 29.6.85 passed by III Additional Judge, Rewa in Criminal Revision No. 46 of 1985.

(2.) Petitioner Indraraj Singh had filed a complaint under section 145 Criminal Procedure Code (hereinafter referred to as the Code) in the year 1983 against the non-applicants with regard to the dispute regarding lands as mentioned in the complaint in village Sardaman. The dispute, as alleged, was likely to result in breach of peace. The Station House Officer had also, on enquiry, submitted a report supporting that the dispute existed and there was a likelihood of breach of peace. Prayer had also been made for attachment of the disputed land. The Sub-Divisional Magistrate passed a preliminary order and issued notices to the parties. Thereafter, orders of attachment were also passed. A supardar was appointed and the parties were given opportunities to adduce evidence. The Sub Divisional Magistrate, on the basis of the material on record, found that the disputed land was Government land and had been allotted to Indraraj Singh on the ground of his being an Exserviceman and the other side was in unauthorized possession thereof. He also found that the non-applicants were dispossessed on 6-10.78 and possession had been handed over to the Petitioner. He further found that in the copies of the revenue record, the petitioner has been shown to be in possession from 1979-80 to 1981-82, which goes to show that from 6.10.1978 till 3-3-1984 the petitioner was in possession of the lands in dispute and the other-side was not in possession He thus declared the possession to be that of the petitioner and passed an order restraining the non-applicants from interfering with the possession of the petitioner. The possession of the disputed land was ordered to be delivered to the petitioner. Aggrieved by that order; the non applicants filed a revision before the Court of Sessions.

(3.) The Additional Sessions Judge found that the preliminary order was passed on 3-3-1983 and the copy (Ex. P-3) of the Khasra was for the years 1978-80, 1980-81 and 1981-82, but no copy of Khasra for the year 1983-84 was tiled to show as to which of the parties was in possession in the year 1983 and on the date of the preliminary order. He further found that Naib Tahsildar, Mhowgange vide Order (Ex. P-2) dated 22.9.1978 had directed that Rajsingh of whom the present non- applicants are the legal heirs, be dispossessed from the disputed land, but in fact, they were never dispossessed. He also made a reference to an order dated 27-7-1983 of the Tahsildar, which mentions about the possession being with Raja Singh. As I find from the record, there are two orders of the Additional Tahsildar each being of 27-7-1983. However, both of them to go indicate that the possession continued with the non-applicants. On a totality of the circumstances, learned Additional Sessions Judge found that the applicant may be having a right to possess the disputed land on the basis of the allotment order in is favour, but what has to be seen in the present proceedings is the question of possession. Accordingly, he allowed the revision and set aside the order of the Sub Divisional Magistrate. He found the possession to be with the present non applicants and. therefore, directed to restore the possession to them. Against that order, this revision has been filed.