A MAHALAKSHMI Vs. PSUBBARAYADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Magistrate found max there was no likelihood of a breach of the peace and refused to take action under Section 145 of the Criminal Procedure Code. If so, he had no jurisdiction to pass the direction in paragraph 9 of his order. It is hereby set aside, vide Subbarama Aiyar v. Mariya Pillai 24 Ind. Cas. 967 : 16 M.L.T. 52 : 1 L.W. 493 : 15 Cr.L.J. 559 : (1914) M.W.N. 798. THE proceeds realised in the sale of the crops will be restored to the persons from whose possession the crops were taken, viz., the petitioners in this Court who admittedly raised the crops. It appears that the right to cultivate the land, was also put to auction and the land was let out to the highest bidder. If so, the rents realised also property belong to the petitioners in this Court.

(2.) THESE rents will also be paid to them by the Magistrate.