NACHHATTAR SINGH Vs. GURINDER SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER Nachhatar Singh and others invoked inherent jurisdiction of this Court under section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing the impugned order dated 12th February, 1982 passed by the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Nabha, attaching the property (land and crop) in dispute and appointing a receiver for its management on a police report made to him on 21st January, 1982 at the instance of Gurinder Singh respondent inter alia on two grounds :-

(2.) THIS petition when first came up before me, I referred the first question for the decision of the larger Bench which has vide its judgment dated 12th November, 1982 held that in an emergency composite order could be passed.

(3.) ON 15th March, 1974 petitioners suit for permanent injunction restraining respondents Nos. 2 to 4 namely Jagdev Singh, Sukhpal Singh and Harpal Singh, from interfering with their possession of the suit land was decreed and permanent mandatory injunction restraining respondents Nos. 2 to 4 from interfering with the possession of the suit land was granted. On 7th February, 1977 an appeal at the instance of respondents 2 to 4 against the judgment and decree of the trial Court was dismissed by the senior Subordinate Judge Patiala. Since respondents Nos. 2 to 4 did not desist from interfering with the possession of the petitioners on suit land the petitioners filed an application under Order 21 Rule 32 C.P.C. for the enforcement of the order on 15th March, 1977. Respondents 2 to 4 made a statement in Court that they had not interfered with the possession of the petitioners over the suit land nor they had any intention to interfere in future with the possession of the suit land. In view of the said statement, the application was consigned to the record room vide order dated 29th January, 1980. Apparently respondents 2 to 4 were in no mood to be restrained by the Court and again tried to interfere with the possession of the petitioners over the suit land which led the petitioners to file the second application under order 21 Rule 33, C.P.C. on 4th February 1980. During the pendency of that application, on 20th April, 1980 respondents 2 to 4 filed a declaratory suit against the petitioners that they were in possession of the very suit land. Also during the pendency of the said second execution application, one Gurinder Singh on 13th September, 1980 filed a suit for permanent injunction to which besides impleading respondents 2 to 4 as defendants, he also impleaded the petitioners herein as defendants. He secured an ex parte collusive decree against the petitioners while respondents 2 to 4 admitted his claim and allowed an adverse decree of injunction being passed against them. On coming to knew about the said ex parte decree the petitioners moved the trial Court to set aside the ex parte decree against them in the meantime the executing Court dealing with their second execution application filed on 4th February, 1980 held on 19th February, 1981 that respondents 2 to 4 were interfering with the possession of the petitioners over the suit land and it ordered the attachment and sale of the land of respondents 2 to 4. On 6th April, 1981 High Court dismissed the revision petition of respondents 2 to 4 against the order dated 19th February, 1981. On 6th November, 1981 the trial Court in the proceedings arising from the application of the petitioners to set aside the ex parte decree fraudulently secured against them by Gurinder Singh respondent No. 1 on his aforementioned suit passed an interim order directing Gurinder Singh respondent No. 1 and Hari Singh his co-plaintiff not to forcibly dispossess the petitioners from the suit land. It is thereafter that Gurinder Singh on 20th January, 1982 made, a report to the police to the effect that the petitioners herein were trying to forcibly dispossess him of the suit land. The police submitted its report on 21st January, 1982 and the learned Executive Magistrate passed the impugned order on 12th February, 1982, without so much as issuing a notice to the petitioners.