GANGADHAR BHUYAN Vs. BIJAY KUMAR MISHRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsellor the petitioner. Opposite party did not appear in spite of service of notice. On being requested, Sri R.R. Patnaik, a learned counsel of this Court addresses this Court as amicas curiae.

(2.) PETITIONERS , after being convicted by the J.M.F.C., Kendrapara in I.C.C. Case No. 112 of 1989/T.R.No. 31 of 1993 for the offences Under Sections 447 and 379, I.P.C. and having failed to obtain order of acquittal from the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Kendrapara in Criminal Appeal No. 109/25 of 1993, have preferred this revision, challenging the judgment and order of conviction recorded by the Courts below.

(3.) DURING the course of trial, opposite party examined three witnesses including himself as P.W. 2. He also relied upon the Registered sale deeds (Exts. 1 and 5), the draft record of rights (Exts. 2 and .3) and rent receipts (Exts. 4 to 4/e). Petitioner Nos. 1 to 3 in their defence advanced the plea of bona fide right of title and possession over the disputed case land and the other petitioners who were the engaged labourers denied to the right of the opposite party over the disputed case land and also denied about happening of the occurrence. In support of the defence, in the trial Court, petitioners relied upon the evidence of petitioner No. 1 as D.W. 1. In addition to that they also relied upon the Sabik R.O.R. (Ext. A) and rent receipts of the years 1990 and 1992 vide Exts. B to B/3. In the Criminal Appeal, petitioners further relied upon the decisions of the Consolidation Authorities which were marked as Ext. C to Ext. E.