HARTEJ SINGH Vs. AMARJIT SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner Hartej Singh son of Joginder Singh gave a complaint dated 21-5-1994 to Station House Officer, Civil Lines, Amritsar (annexure P-11) wherein he had alleged that the property bearing No. 13 Khanna Street, Amritsar, was owned and possessed by Devinder Kaur (his paternal aunt) who had no issue and had executed a will in his (petitioner's) favour in respect of the open space and one room and gave the constructed building to the Chief Khalsa Dewan, Amritsar (the third-respondent-herein). The petitioner has further alleged that Amarjit Singh (first respondent) claims to be the owner of vacant space on the basis of some forged and fictitious sale deed, but, he has nothing to do with the property in the possession of the petitioner. According to the petitioner, Amarjit Singh intended to take forcible possession of the property of the petitioner, and Jasbir Singh (fourth-respondent-herein) also alleged himself to be the vendee from Chief Khalsa Dewan and is also threatening to take possession forcibly. The petitioner has further alleged that there is every likelihood of breach of peace, and therefore, had requested the Station House Officer, to initiate proceedings under S. 145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (since the parties have already been proceeded against under S. 107/151 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, regarding the property No. 13, Khanna Street, Amritsar.

(2.) On the basis of this, the Station House Officer, Police Station Civil Lines, Amritsar, presented Calenra dated 23-5-1994 to the Executive Magistrate, Amritsar, alleging that Devinder Kaur was the owner of the House at No. 13 Khanna Street, Circular Road, Amritsar, that apart from the house there is vacant plot and a servant room in one corner, that as per the will of Devinder Kaur the constructed and covered part was given to Chief Khalsa Dewan, Amritsar, whereas the rent of the vacant open area and the room on the one corner of the plot was bequeathed to the petitioner-Hartej Singh. He has further stated that after the death of Devinder Kaur on 13-1-1988 the covered part of the house became the property of Chief Khalsa Dewan (third-respondent) while the vacant plot and a room became the property of petitioner-Hartej Singh. According to this Calendra the Chief Khalsa Dewan had sold covered part of the house of Jasbir Singh (fourth-respondent-herein) for Rs. 7 lakhs by an agreement and possession was also delivered.

(3.) It has further been alleged in the Calendra that there is only one main gate that the petitioner's room is in front of this gate and that Hartej Singh used to go through this main gate. According to this Calendra Jasbir Singh, who had purchased the covered part of the house from Chief Khalsa Dewan, claiming right to the main gate and the open space did not allow petitioner-Hartej Singh to enter, whereas, Hartej Singh claims that he has right and was in possession of the main gate and the vacant area in front of the main gate and his room. The Station House Officer, has further alleged in the Calendra that both parties are indispute and, therefore, proceedings under S. 107/151 of the Code of Criminal Procedure have been initiated.