RAMNIKLAL KOTHARI Vs. BHUNESHWAR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application in revision is directed against the final order in a proceeding under Section 145, Code of Criminal Procedure, hereinafter referred to as 'the Code', passed by a Magistrate exercising first class powers at Giridih on the 15th October, 1968, in conformity with the decision of the Munsif of Giridih dated the 10th August, 1968, to whom the question of possession over the subject of dispute was referred under Sub-section (1) of Section 146 of the Code under the order of the Enquiring Magistrate dated the 1st June, 1967. The petitioners are the second party to the proceeding which was ordered to be drawn up on the 29/30th September, 1966, while dealing with a proceeding under Section 144 of the Code which was drawn up against both the parties to the dispute on the 5th August, 1966. The subject of dispute was 387.30 acres of land (wrongly totalled as 388.00 acres) of coal bearing land situated towards the north of the Gomoh-Barkakhana Railway line in village Turio, within the jurisdiction of Bermo police station, in the district of Hazaribagh. The former proprietor of the village was the Raja Bahadur of Ramgarh, whose estate vested in the State of Bihar in 1953-54.

(2.) The case of the first party was that they had entered into possession over the entire land comprised in village Turio, measuring 2810 bighas or thereabouts, by virtue of a lease executed in their favour by the Raja Bahadur on the 26th February, 1946, and had begun mining operations under the name and style of Turio Colliery. The term of the lease was for three years, but they continued to hold over even after the expiry of the said term, except with respect to 600 bighas out of the aforesaid 2810 bighas, which they had released and allowed to be leased out to two other persons in order to avoid litigation and dispute. Out of the said area of 600 bighas situated towards the north of the Railway line, 100 bighas were subsequently leased out to one B. J. Dave and 500 bighas to Ramchandar Singh, the father of the second petitioner Gouri Shanker Singh. In the meantime, the Raja Bahadur had assigned his interest in the village to a company known as the Jharkhand Industries and Mines Limited. It was this company which had granted the lease to B. J. Dave and Ramchandar Singh as aforesaid sometime in 1949. The possession of the first party over the rest of the village continued as before. After the vesting of the estate, a series of litigations broke out between the Raja Bahadur and the State of Bihar. In the meantime, the first party applied to the State Government for being recognised as a mining lessee with respect to the area of 2210 bighas, including the disputed 387.30 acres which lies contiguous to the 500 bighas, of which the second party were in possession by virtue of their lease from the company. In this connection there were various correspondence between the first party and the State Government, which ultimately demanded the arrears of rent and royalty amounting to rupees one lac and odd from the first party. The first party paid the bulk of the arrears to the State Government and were paying the balance in stipulated instalments of Rs. 2,000/- per month, commencing from the 15th August, 1966. In June, 1966, the State Government recommended to the Central Government for grant of a mining lease to the first party, but before the approval of the Central Government was received, the police made a report of apprehension of breach of the peace between the parties, whereupon a proceeding under Section 144 of the Code was drawn up in the first instance against the first party only, but subsequently against both the parties, on the 5th August, 1966, as already stated.

(3.) The case of the second party was that after the expiry of the term of the lease dated the 26th February, 1946, the first party were not in possession at all over the disputed area, nor had they carried on any mining operations over the same. In 1949, three leases were executed by Jharkhand Industries and Mines Limited; one in favour of B. J. Dave in respect of 100 bighas, another in favour of Ramchandar Singh in respect of 500 bighas and the third in favour of the first party in respect of 500 bighas. This lease in favour of the first party related to lands situated towards the south of the Railway line, while the lease in favour of the second party was in respect of land situated towards the north of the Railway line. Since then the mining and prospecting operations of the first party have been confined to the aforesaid southern portion of 500 bighas, whereas the second party as well as B. J. Dave started coal mining operations in their respective lease-hold lands situated on the north of the Railway line. The further case of the second party was that the disputed land lies in the immediate surrounding of their tract of 500 bighas and so the members of the second party extended their possession over the disputed land by performing various acts like dumping the extracted coal, erecting sheds or Dhowrahs for coolies, inclines, shafts, etc. The further case of the second party was that it was they who had first applied to the State Government for a lease of the disputed land, but the State Government were influenced by the first party, whose case was recommended to the Central Government. The second party, however, filed a revision before the Central Government which was pending at the time when the present proceeding was drawn up.