JETHU Vs. SOOTHIA AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a revision-petition filed by Jethu against the judgment of the Additional Sessions Judge No. 1, Jodhpur dated 24-3-1976, reversing the order of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Jodhpur, dated 30-8-1974, in a proceeding under Sec. 145. Cr. P. C.

(2.) The short facts giving rise to this revision-petition may be stated as under:- Upon being satisfied on an application presented before him by Jethu that a dispute likely to cause a breach of the peace concerning agricultural land comprised in Khasra No. 40 measuring 55 Bighas and 8 Biswas and situated in village Sadasani Tehsil Jodhpur, exists between Jethu petitioner, hereinafter referred to as party No. 1, and Sothia and others, hereinafter referred to as party No. 2, the Sub-Divisional Magistrate. Jodhpur, passed a preliminary order on 18-6-73 requiring the parties concern in to appear in his court and to put in written statements of their respective claims as regards the fact of actual possession over the disputed land and calling upon them to produce documents and adduce evidence by putting in affidavits of such persons as they relied upon in support of their claims. It appears from the record of the lower court that each party claimed itself to be in actual possession of the land in dispute to the exclusion of the other at the date of the preliminary order and produced document and put in their affidavits and the affidavits of their witnesses in support of their claims. The Sub-Divisional Magistrate considered the entire evidence led by the parties and came to a conclusion that Jethu party No. 1 was in continuous exclusive possession of the disputed land at the relevant date, i.e. on 18-6-1973. He, therefore, declared the possession of party No. 1 over the land under controversy at the date of the preliminary order and restrained the non-petitioners, i.e. party No. 2 from causing any interference with such possession until Jethu was evicted therefrom in due course of law.

(3.) The Sub-Divisional Magistrate further released the land from attachment and directed the Station House Officer, Mahamandir, to hand over its possession to party No. 1 Aggrieved this order, the non-petitioners hied a revision-petition in the' court of the Sessions Judge, Jodhpur. The revision-petition was transferred to the Court of the Additional Sessions Judge No. 1 Jodhpur, for disposal in accordance with law. The learned Additional Sessions Judge came to a different conclusion upon evidence adduced in the case and set aside the order passed by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate and declared the possession of the non-petitioners over the subject of dispute at the date of the preliminary order. As against this Judgment, Jethu party No. 1 has come-up in revision to this Court.