BISHAN NARAIN BHARGAVA Vs. MADAN LAL GULATI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present Revision Petition has been filed by Bishan Narain Bhargava, against the order dated 24-5-1990 (Annexure P-4) passed by the learned City Magistrate, Rewari, in pursuance of which, the order of attachment passed by the Executive Magistrate, on 24-6-1988 (Annexure P-2) was withdrawn and a direction was issued to the Receiver to hand over the possession of the disputed shop to Madan Lal Gulati respondent. The said order is assailed to the extent that the possession of the disputed shop was ordered to be given to Madan Lal Gulati respondent.

(2.) The facts leading to the present case are that the petitioner Bishan Narain Bhargava purchased 1/3rd share of Deen Dayal Bhargava son of Raghbar Dayal Bhargava, out of the five shopping complex in various locations including one shopping complex at Ganj Bazar and another Shopping Complex at Bajaja Bazar, Rewari. Deen Dayal Bhargava was co-owner jointly with Sarvshri Uma Kant alias Hari Shankar son of Bishamber Dayal, Ram Avtar adopted son of Baseshwar Dayal Bhargava, Smt. Kirpa Rani widow of Deen Dayal Bhargava and Smt. Kaushalya Devi widow of Deen Dayal Bhargava. This sale was effected sometime in the year 1968. The possession of the shops was not given by the vendor. Consequently, the petitioner resorted to civil litigation to get possession of the share of Deen Dayal Bhargava, which he had purchased. He filed a suit for partition titled Bishan Narain Versus Uma Kant, which was decided by the learned Sub-Judge 1st Class, Rewari on 22-1-1983 and its final decree was prepared on 28-3-1984. The learned Sub-Judge 1st Class, Rewari, ordered the partition of the five shopping complexes. It was decreed that possession be given of the shops to the vendor, located at Bajaja Bazar and Ganj Bazar, Rewari. These two shopping complexes in the partition proceedings fell to the share of Deen Dayal Bhargava, the vendor. It is in consequence of the civil suit that warrants of possession in favour of the petitioner were issued by the learned Sub-Judge 1st Class, Rewari on 14-6-1988. The Warrant Officer went to the shop on 16-6-1988 in accordance with the orders of the Civil Court and with the police help possession of the shop was handed over to the decree holder Bishan Narain Bhargava petitioner.

(3.) The case of the petitioner Bishan Narain is that on the next date i.e. 17-6-1988, the respondent Madan Lal Gulati along with some other unlawful elements, trespassed and forcibly evicted him from the shop and took possession. As a result of which, the petitioner approached the police for appropriate action and the police instead of taking proper action took possession of the shop and initiated proceedings under Section 145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C. - for short). The Executive Magistrate, Rewari, issued warrants of attachment of the shopping complex on 24-6-1988 (Annexure P-2) and he also while exercising powers under Section 146 of the Cr.P.C. issued warrants of attachment of the disputed shop. The Tehsildar Revenue was appointed as Receiver on 25-6-1998. The Receiver, was authorised to take possession of the shop till the time the proceedings in the suit with regard to the possession of the shop was decided between the parties as per the Civil Court decree. Madan Lal Gulati respondent herein filed a Criminal Revision in the Court of Learned Sessions Judge, Narnaul, against the aforesaid order dated 24-6-1988 (Annexure P-2). The Revision Petition of Madan Lal Gulati respondent was accepted and the order dated 24-6-1988 passed by the learned Executive Magistrate was quashed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Narnaul, on 29-3-1990 (Annexure P-3) and the parties were directed to seek the necessary orders from the Civil Court as the matter was pending before the Additional Senior Sub-Judge, Rewari. It is as a consequence of quashing of the order dated 24-6-1988 that the City Magistrate, Rewari, in pursuance of the impugned order passed on 24-5-1990 ordered that the possession of the shop be given to Madan Lal Gulati respondent. As already noticed above it is said order dated 24-5-1990 (Annexure P-4) that has been assailed by the petitioner in this revision petition. Notice in the case was issued by this Court on 24-7-1990 and the operation of the impugned order dated 24-5-1990 (Annexure P-4) was stayed in the meanwhile.