MANGTURAM SANGANERIA Vs. SHRI KARTIK BHOWMICK AND ANR.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision is directed against the concurrent findings or fact of the courts below. The proceedings under Sec. 145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, registered as Misc. Case No. 695 M 80, was dropped by the Executive Magistrate by order dated 5.1.1981.

(2.) The relevant facts are that the 1st party Petitioner filed an application dated 16.12.1980 before the Executive Magistrate, Gauhati claiming that be was the owner of Stall No. 14A in New Market, Gauhati, which was, let out to the second party as a tenant. The second party temporary vacated the room for a period of 6 months but after sometime re -occupied it and started his shop without obtaining permission from the first party -Petitioner. The First party -Petitioner was afraid of the second party as he was a quarrelsome person. He claimed that there was apprehension of breach of peace, in respect of the possession of the shop room. The application was forwarded to the police for inquiry and report. The police submitted a report stating that there was apprehension of breach of peace between the parties. Accordingly, learned Magistrate drew up a proceeding under Sec. 145(1) Code of Criminal Procedure and directed both the parties to file written statement and adduce evidence or documents in support of their respective claim of possession over the disputed room. Meanwhile the learned Magistrate directed the police to attach the room under Sec. 146 Code of Criminal Procedure. On 5.1.81 learned Executive Magistrate upon hearing both the patties dropped the proceedings and held that it was a civil dispute. In other words, learned Magistrate directed the Petitioner to seek relief in civil Court. Being aggrieved the first party -Petitioner preferred a revision before the Sessions Judge, Kamrup at Gauhati.

(3.) Learned Judge discussed all the points urged and upheld the order dropping the proceedings. It is a speaking order. Learned Judge has considered all aspects of the matter. I find that the proceeding which was drawn in 1980 was dropped in 1981 and the order was affirmed in 1981. It has come up for disposal to -day before this Court.