RAM PAL Vs. HARISH CHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Does the pendency of civil proceedings regarding possession between the same parties pertaining to the same land bar proceedings under section 145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, (hereinafter referred to as Tthe CodeT). Herein lies the controversy raised.

(2.) The dispute here is with regard to 24 kanals and 14 marlas of land, which was owned by one Harish Chand. On August 8, 1982, he is said to have entered into an agreement for the sale of this land to the petitioner and on receipt of earnest money, delivered possession thereof too, to the petitioner. Later on January 17, 1983 the said Harish Chand is said to have executed a 99 years lease in favour of the respondents. It was in this situation that the petitioner-Ram Pal, on February 2, 1983, filed an application under section 145 of the Code in the court of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Ballabgarh, who, by his order of February 18, 1983, attached the land in dispute and appointed a Receiver in respect thereof. This order was set aside in revision by the Additional Sessions Judge, but was restored by the High Court.

(3.) Both the parties, thereafter, went to the civil court. The petitioner sought a decree for specific performance while the respondents claimed under the 99 years lease of January 17,1983. Both these suits were consolidated and in the application for temporary injunction, an order was passed that status quo regarding possession be maintained.