JIWANI Vs. DANARAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PARTY No. 1 in this case consists of Mst. Jiwani, widow of Gularam and Rawat Ram Jat. PARTY No. 2 is composed of Danaram Jat. The dispute between the two parties relates to land (Khasra Nos. 15/8, 18/8, and 25/ (8), measuring 137 Bighas and 16 Biswas, situated in village Bhanipura. On October 17, 1966, Station House Officer, Loonkaransar, District Bikaner, submitted a report to Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Bikaner, to the effect that there existed serious controversy between the two parties in respect of the above land. The land was in possession of Rawatram, son-in-law of Mst. Jiwani, widow of Gularam. Some litigation regarding this land had proceeded between the two parties. Finally, the matter was decided by the Revenue Appellate Authority, Bikaner, on August 28, 1965. The said Station House Officer further reported that there existed apprehension of breach of the peace and, therefore, proceedings under section 145, Cr. P. C. , should be undertaken. On October 18, 1966, a preliminary order was drawn by learned Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Bikaner, wherein it was mentioned that there was a controversy regarding land, described as Khasra Nos. 15/8, 18/8 and 25/8, measuring 137 Bighas and 16 Biswas. The order further recited that the parties concerned should put in written statements, documents and affidavits in respect of rival claims respects the fact of actual possession of the subject of dispute. That very day, the property was ordered to be put under attachment under S. 145 (4), Cr. P. C. The standing crop was sold for Rs. 1800/-, and that amount was deposited in the court of learned Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Bikaner. In pursuance of the above preliminary order, both the parties filed written statements, relevant documents, and affidavits in the court Finally learned Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Bikaner, by his order dated May 20, 1967, concluded that it was Danaram who was in actual possession of the property within a period of two months next before the date of the preliminary order. He, therefore, directed that attachment should be released and the land should be put in possession of the non-petitioner Dana Ram. He also passed an order that Rs. 1800/-, received on account of the sale of the standing crop, should be given to Danaram. Against the above order, a revision-application was filed in the court of Sessions Judge, Bikaner, who by his order, dated October 5, 1967, dismissed the same.

(2.) AGAINST the above two orders, party No. 1 has filed the present revision-petition. Party No. 1 is represented by Shri Hastimal Parekh and Shri Pannalal Agarwala put up appearance on behalf of party No. 2. Assistant Government Advocate, Shri A. K. Mathur, represented the State of Rajasthan.