Short Note : 1. The dispute related to a house. Non-applicant Gopalsingh had purchased the same flam Laltabai on 1-1-1970 and had taken possession of the same. Non-applicants Mukutsingh and Jagatsingh were trying to take forcible possession of the house. On 9-2-1973, after getting the police report, the Sub-Divisional Magistrate passed order for attachment of the disputed house. Held : On perusal of the impugned order dated 9-2-1973, it appears that the learned Sub Divisional Magistrate has not at all mentioned if he was satisfied as to the existence of apprehension of breach of peace and consequently, there was no mention of satisfaction as the existence of emergency to warrant issuance of attachment of the disputed house. The mere fact that there was police report and notice under section 145 (1) of the Code was issued to the parties and that the application mentioned the grievousness of the situation, would by itself would not lead to conclude that the learned Sub-Divisional Magistrate must have felt satisfied as to the existence of the apprehension of the breach of peace or it being a case of emergency. Matua Hukum Singh v. Sipahilal Khubi, 1959 JLJ 246 , State v. Daryao, 1971 MPLJ-SN 84, State v. Chunnilal, 1974 JLJ-SN 21, relied on. Revision allowed.