LAWS(GAU)-2015-8-69

RAM MURAT AGRAHARI Vs. SARASWATI DEVI AND ORS.

Decided On August 13, 2015
Ram Murat Agrahari Appellant
V/S
Saraswati Devi And Ors. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The opposite party, herein, as 1st party filed a petition before the learned Executive Magistrate, Karbi Anglong, Diphu under Section 145 Cr.P.C. alleging therein that regarding possession over a land described in the schedule of the petition, there was likelihood of breach of peace between the 1st party and the 2nd party. The learned Magistrate acting on the petition called for a police report and accordingly police submitted a report. A proceeding was drawn up vide M.R. Case No. 39/1996 and the land described in the schedule of the petition was attached as per provision of Section 146(1) of the Cr.P.C. Both parties adduced evidence oral as well as documentary and the learned Magistrate after satisfying himself that the land had been in possession of the 2nd party declared possession in his favour. Against the order of the learned Magistrate appeal was preferred before the learned Additional Deputy Commissioner, Karbi Anglong, Diphu. The learned Additional Deputy Commissioner set aside the order of the learned Executive Magistrate and declared possession in favour of the appellant 1st party. Being aggrieved the 2nd Party has filed this revision for setting aside the order of the learned Additional Deputy Commissioner.

(2.) Heard learned advocates appearing on behalf of the revision petitioner. None appeared for the opposite parties.

(3.) It is contended inter-alia by the petitioner that the learned Additional Deputy Commissioner passed the order solely on the ground that the petitioner was not examined as a witness in the case which clearly reveals non application of mind on his part. Some anomalies in the schedule of the land was also pointed out by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner. It is further contended that the description of the land given by the witnesses is different from the land described in the schedule of the petition and the Appellate Court without going through the materials available on record arbitrarily passed the order.