PRATAPVAN Vs. CHHOGNATH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision petition is directed against the order dated May 4, 1989, passed by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Sojat, by which the learned Magistrate rejected the application of the petitioners for dropping the proceedings and refused to drop the proceedings.

(2.) THE brief facts of the case are : that the non-petitioners Chhognath, Jagannath and Chhotunath filed a suit for permanent injunction against the petitioners in the Revenue Court with respect to the land bearing Khasra number 806, 807, 808 and 809, situated at village Saran, district Pali, and that Suit is still pending. Along with this suit, an application for temporary injunction was also moved, but the learned Trial Court rejected the application for grant of temporary injunction by its order dated December 29, 1987. Dissatisfied with the order rejecting the application for grant of temporary injunction, an appeal was preferred by Chhognath and others before the Revenue Appellate Authority and that appeal is still pending. THE Revenue Appellate Authority granted injunction in favour of Chhognath and others. Though the revenue suit filed by Chhognath and others, as well as the appeal against the refusal of the temporary injunction were pending, but still Chhognath and others filed an application under Section 145, Cr. P. C. in the Court of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Sojat, on August 2, 1988. THE learned Sub-Divisional Magistrate drew a preliminary order on August 2, 1988 and issued notices to the party No. 2. After the service of the notices on the petitioners, the petitioners, on September 8, 1988, moved an application before the Sub-Divisional Magistrate praying therein that as the revenue suit as well as the appeal against the refusal of the temporary injunction, are pending before the Revenue Court and hence the proceedings under Section 145, Cr. P. C. are not maintainable, therefore, they may be dropped. THE learned Sub-Divisional Magistrate, by his order dated May 4, 1989, decided the application filed by the petitioners and refused to drop the proceedings. It is against this order that the present petition under Section 482, Cr. P. C. has been filed.

(3.) IN the case of 1990 Cr. L. J. 1917, 1989 Cr. LJ. 2033, 1989 Cr. L. J. (NOC) 212, 1989 Cr. L. J. 1836 and 1989 Cr. L. J. (NOC) 138, while deciding the case, the judgment in Ram Sumar Puri Mahant's case (Supra) was not considered and, therefore, they are not of any help to the respondents.