RADHA KISHEN Vs. INDER PARKASH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition must be allowed on the short ground that the learned Magistrate has appropriated to himself the functions of a civil Court. It seems that the Basheshar Nath Trust, of which Indar Parkash respondent is a trustee, is the owner of a certain building situate in Ambala which is in the occupation of Mt. Tulson and Radha Kishen petitioners. Indar Parkash wanted to pull down the building with the object of constructing a maternity hospital known as the "atma Devi-Basheshar Nath Hindu Maternity Home. " The tenants refused to vacate the premises and proceedings under Ss. 144/107, Criminal P. C. , were initiated against them on the ground that they were obstructing the construction of the hospital. These proceedings terminated in an order to the effect that the building in the possession of Radha Kishen and Mt. Tulsan should be handed over to Indar Parkash and that if they fail to comply with this order Indar Parkash would be at liberty to demolish the building after the expiry of a fortnight from the date of the sad order. Mt. 'tulsan and Radha Kishen refused to comply with the order and were evicted from the promises with the help of the police. They " have come to this Court in revision and the question for this Court is whether the Court below has come to a correct; determination in point of law.

(2.) INSTEAD of following the somewhat lengthy procedure which is involved in obtaining possession through the agency of the civil Court Indar Parkash decided to take a short cut by moving machinery of the criminal Courts. The action taken by him was wholly misconceived and should not have been endorsed by the learned Magistrate. Section 144, Criminal P. C. does not, entitle a landlord to secure the eviction of a tenant through the intervention of a criminal Court and it is an abuse of the process of the Court to invoke the help of that section for the remedy of a civil wrong. In Hafiz-ud-Din v. C. Laboide, A. I, R. (13) 1928 ALL. 14, Iqbal Ahmad J. held that Section 144, Criminal P. C. is not intended to empower a Magistrate to decide disputes of a civil nature between private individuals and to usurp the functions of a civil Court and in Brindaban Shaw v. Narendra, Nath A. I. R. (35) 1948 Cal. 192, a Division Bench of the Calcutta High Court expressed the view that no landlord can pull down the premise in the lawful occupation of a tenant, that the tenancy must first he terminated by legal order for eviction and that no order of eviction can be made under Section 144, Criminal P. C.

(3.) FOR these reasons, I set aside the order in question and quash the proceedings under S. 144, Criminal P. C. , and direct that the building which was in the possession of Mt Tulsan and Radha Kishen be given back to them. After the building has been restored to the lawful possession of the tenants it will be open to the landlord, if he is be advised, to secure their eviction by the institution of a civil suit.