JETHMUL BHOJRAJ Vs. HARBANS NARAIN SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) There is a triangular fight in this case. The dispute relates to certain mines, and there are three sets of claimants of these mines. Firm Jethmull Bhojraj (petitioner No. 1) is one of the claimants. Petitioner No. 2 is one of the partners of the firm and petitioner No. 3 is its servant. Opposite party Nos. 16 to 21 are other servants of this firm. The second set of claimant is the Indian Mica Supply Co. Ltd., opposite party No. 22. Opposite party Nos. 1 to 7 are the servants of opposite party No. 22 and they are represented by the Advocate General. The third set of claimants consists of opposite party Nos. 8 to 13 who are represented by Mr. Aswini Kumar Roy.

(2.) On 1-3-1954, a proceeding under Section 145, Criminal P. C., was drawn up with respect to these mines in which opposite party Nos. 1 to 7 are first party, petitioner No, 3 and opposite party Nos. 16 to 21 are the second party and opposite party Nos. 8 to 15 are the third party. A petition in revision ('Cri. Revn. No. 264 of 1954 (Pat) (A)') was filed in this Court for quashing the proceeding, but that was dismissed on 30-4-1954. Along with the proceeding drawn up on 1-3-1954, the learned Sub-divisional Officer also passed on the same date an order of attachment of the mines, which are the subject-matter of that proceeding, under Section 145 (4), Criminal P. C. The actual attachment of the various mines in dispute was made on the 3rd and the 4th of March, 1954. Petitioner No. 1, on 5-3-1954, made an application for making arrangements for working out the mines by settling the same with the firm on such terms as the Court might consider it proper. That application was rejected by an order dated 24-3-1954, and the present revision application is directed against that order.

(3.) Before dealing with the case of the parties, a brief statement of facts may, perhaps, have to be given. There is no controversy on these facts between the parties. Gadi Manjhiladih consists of eighteen villages including those villages in which the disputed mines lie. Rai Sahib Sundermull Rajgarhia, founder of the Indian Mica Supply Co. Ltd. (opposite party No. 22), took mining leases of the entire Gadi Manjhiladih, in the year 1915, on a rental of Rs. 258/-, for a period of twenty years with a clause for renewal of the leases for another period of twenty years. Uhdisputedly, the mines have been opened, worked and developed by the Indian Mica Supply Co. Ltd. at a huge cost. In the year 1928 the estate of proprietors, who had granted leases to Rai Sahib Sundermull Rajgarhia, was taken over under the management of the Chotanagpur Encumbered Estate. This was during the subsistence of the mining leases referred to above. Even then, by agreement between Rai Sahib Sundermull and the manager of the Chotanagpur Encumbered Estate, a fresh lease was created on 1-4-1928, in respect of the whole Gadi Manjhiladih at a rental of Rs. 3000/- for a period of fifteen years in favour of Sri Madanlal, son of Rai Sahib Sundermull, who had died by that time There was in that lease also a clause of renewal of the lease for another period of twenty years on the original Rent of Rs. 258/- per year. In the year 1935 opposite party No. 22 took a sub-lease of the mines from Rai Sahib Sundermull, and since then it had been in possession of the mines doing mining operations, and developing and starting mines in Gadi Manjhiladih. The lease executed by the manager of the Chotanagpur Encumbered Estate was to expire on 31-3-1943, and, before that date, Madanlal wanted to have his lease renewed as stipulated between the parties. The estate of proprietors of the mines in question was still under the management of the Chotanagpur Encumbered Estate, but the estate was going to be released from its management soon after. The proprietors objected to the renewal of the lease in favour of Madanlal and, therefore, the manager of the Chotanagpur Encumbered Estate put off the renewal of the lease till the estate was to be released. On 15-4-1943, therefore, Madanlal filed Title Suit No. 7 of 1943 in the Court of the Subordinate Judge at Hazaribagh for specific performance of the contract for renewal of the lease. That suit was dismissed on 27-1-1945, and Madanlal filed a first appeal, No. 41 of 1945, in this Court, which is still pending. In the year 1949 the Mineral Concession Rules were made by the Central Government under Section 5, Mines and Minerals (Regulation and Development) Act, 1948 (Act No. 53 of 1948), which, amongst other things, required the mining leases to be executed in accordance with those rules. In the same year the proprietors of the estate, which had already been released from the management of the Chotanagpur Encumbered Estate, formed into a mining syndicate named Manjhiladih Mining Syndicate, and applied for miner's license. They were granted such license in respect of fifteen out of the aforesaid eighteen villages. Their license, could not be renewed as they did not pay the renewal fee. On 2-11-1953, for the first time, petitioner No. 1 came in the picture and obtained mining leases from the proprietors of 11 dams and odd in certain specific plots containing the disputed mines, and, on 9-11-1953, an application was made on its behalf for endorsing the mines in question in its mica miner's license. On 16-11-1953, the inspector of mica accounts recommended for the endorsement being made in favour of the firm. On 25-11-1953, opposite party No. 22 tool: lease from the proprietors of 13 annas and odd of the various mines including the disputed mines for a period of twenty years with retrospective effect from 1943. The contesting opposite parties objected to these mines being endorsed in miner's license of petitioner No. 1. While the question of endorsement of the mines was still pending before the Mica Controller petitioner No. 1, on 20-12-1953, fixed up boilers, com-pressure and other tools and machineries on the aforesaid mines. That led to a clash between the parties and on the very next day, that is, on 21-12-1953, a proceeding under Section 144, Criminal P. C. was drawn up restraining all the parties from going upon the land and directing them to show cause against that order. The parties showed cause, and on 16-1-1954, opposite party No. 22 and the other contesting opposite party put in a petition before the Mica Controller informing him that there was a dispute between the parties over the possession of mines in question and a proceeding under Section 144, Criminal P. C., had already started. The Mica Controller, however, on 25-1-1954, without considering the effect of the proceeding under Section 144, Criminal P. C., and the fact that all parties had been restrained by the Sub-divisional Magistrate from going upon the land, passed an order for endorsing these mines on the mica miner's license of petitioner No. 1. On 1-2-1954, the order under Section 144, Criminal P. C., was made absolute against petitioner No. I and vacated against the other parties. Petitioner No. 1 went in revision against that order to the Deputy Commissioner who admitted the application and passed an order for stay of further proceedings. The parties put different interpretations on the stay order and there was again likelihood of their coming into clash. In those circumstances on 5-2-1954, the learned Sub-divisional Magistrate started proceeding under Sections 107 and 117(3), Criminal P. C., directing the parties to execute ad interim bonds of Rs. 500/- each with two sureties of the like amount and to show cause as to why they should not be asked to execute such bonds for a period of one year for maintaining peace. As the force of the order passed under Section 144, Criminal P. C., was only till 18-2-1954, petitioner No. 1 sent its men to mines again on 19-2-1954, to start the mining work. That again led to a dispute between the parties, and on 27-2-1954, the police submitted a report for action under Section 145, Criminal P. C. Accordingly, on 1-3-1954, as already stated, a proceeding under Section 145 of the Code was drawn up and the mines in question were attached under Sub-section (4) of that section.