RAJATHAMMAL Vs. RAJAMANIKKAM PILLAY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Appellate Court reverted the conviction and has found that no criminal forte was used, It ought to have reversed the order directing possession to be given, as the essential ingredient, namely, the use of criminal force, is wanting to give Criminal Courts jurisdiction to act under Section 524. I need only refer to Bat(sic)kala Pottiavadu, In re 26 M. 49 : 2 Weir 676 : 12 M. L. J. 447. If possession has been given, it is the duty of the Court to restore the parties to the position in which they were before possession was wrongly given. Vile Bisweswar Singh V/s. Bhola Nath Pathak 22 Ind. Cas. 1006 : 16 Cr. L. J. 222 : 18 C. W. N. 1147.,

(2.) THE petitioner will be restored to possession.