HARBANS KAUR Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 reveals a typical instance of misuse of procedural laws hurdling progress towards the goal of justice. Before me are two petitioners and supporting respondents Nos 12 to 16, who as heirs of one Chand Singh are pitted on one side against a body to people known as Bhan Singh and others as respondents No. 2 to 8. The bone of contention is, and has been a piece of agricultural land in village Ghanaur Khurd, Tehsil Malerkotla District Sangrur which has kept them for nearly nine years in courts of law without any logical end to the litigation. And it is at some stage or the other that litigation must end in the interest of justice, not only for its conduciveness to the parties but society at large, so that law and judicial process does not become a mockery.

(2.) LET me set out the facts giving rise thereto. The property in question was owned by one Basakha Singh. Undisputably on January 10, 1959, he made a gift thereof in favour of Chand Singh Basakha Singh died on February 9, 1960. The property in question was in possession of Bhan Singh and others. Thus Chand Singh filed a suit for possession to recover the same. The trial court dismissed the suit on June 6, 1974. The Additional District Judge, Sangrur, reversed the judgment and decreed the suit. Blian Singh and others filed R.S.A. No. 1899 of 1974. It came for admission before an Hon'ble Single Judge of this Court on December 13, 1974. It admitted. A learned counsel accepted notice on behalf of Chand Singh. On his behest an order of status quo as to possession was passed. The nature of the suit clearly fixed that the possession map with Bhan Singh and others, but when it was disputed before the motion Bench, it can safely be inferred there was material before the Motion Bench, to pass an order of status quo only. Now, what could possibly be that material, is another matter, which could presently be dealt with.

(3.) GURNAM Singh, J. on August 14, 1975 allowed the petition and ordered that the proceedings taken under Section 145, of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 were uncalled for since the case had been taken to the civil court and a direction had been given by this court to maintain the status quo regarding possession. As a sequel thereto it was ordered that direction of the learned Sub-Divisional Magistrate requiring the parties to file written statement etc. as also for the appointment of Receiver (Naib Tehsildar, Dhuri) be set aside.