Research › Browse › Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court · body

1990 DIGILAW 358 (MP)

HARIRAM SINGH v. MANOHAR RAO

1990-09-12

B.M.LAL

body1990
B. M. LAL, J. ( 1 ) THE decision in this revision shall also govern disposal of Criminal Revision No. 67 of 1989 (Dharam Singh and others v. Sarvarkar Manoharlal Pathak ). Both these revisions arise out of order passed by the S. D. M. , Damoh whereby in exercise of his jurisdiction under section 146 of the Code of Criminal Procedure directed attachment of the disputed property and handing it over to the Tahsildar as Supratdar, against which these revisions have been filed. ( 2 ) IN both the revisions the lands involved are the same, i. e. Khasra No. 1235 admeasuring 8. 31 acres and Khasra No. 1355 admeasuring 17. 34 acres situated in village Bansa Kalan, Tahsil and District Damoh. This fact is not disputed that the. lands in question belong to Deity Murti Shrideo Murlidhar Ji Mandir; Damoh and this land had been leased out to the applicants in both the revisions and by virtue of the said lease, they were in possession of these lands for the last two decades. The non-applicant Sarvarakar Manohar Rao Pathak is looking after this property on behalf of the Deity. ( 3 ) IT appears that in the year 1973 the Sarvarakar of the property tried to dispossess the lessees on account of which proceedings under Section 145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure had been started vide Criminal Case No. 36/73 and ultimately possession of the applicants lessees was confirmed in Criminal Revision No. 205/74 decided on 10/9/1974 by this Court. ( 4 ) HOWEVER, on behalf of the Deity, Civil Suit was filed for dispossession of the lessees from the suit land and the Sarvarakar contested the suit unsuccessfully right from the Civil Court to this Court. This Court in Second Appeal No. 365/66 decided on 14/10/1971 directed the Sarvarakar to resort to the remedy available under Section 168 of the M. P. Land Revenue Code (hereinafter referred to as the Code) as civil suit is barred under Section 257 (k) of the Code. ( 5 ) ACCORDINGLY an application under Section 168 (4) of the Code was moved before the S. D. O. , Damoh. The said application was registered as Revenue case No. 142-B/121/17-78andbyorder dated 12/9/1978 the S. D. O. , Damoh passed order evicting the applicants from the suit lands. ( 5 ) ACCORDINGLY an application under Section 168 (4) of the Code was moved before the S. D. O. , Damoh. The said application was registered as Revenue case No. 142-B/121/17-78andbyorder dated 12/9/1978 the S. D. O. , Damoh passed order evicting the applicants from the suit lands. Against this order unsuccessful applicants preferred appeals before the Collector, Damoh, Commissioner, Revenue Division, Sagar and Board of Revenue, Madhya Pradesh Gwalior. The Board of Revenue, Gwalior by order dated 30/5/1984 while maintaining the order passed by the subordinate revenue Courts referred to above, directed the applicants to hand-over possession of the lands to the Sarvarakar. Accordingly executive proceedings for possession were started and possession was delivered to the Sarvarakar. ( 6 ) HERE it will not be out of place to mention that this legal position is not disputed that the lessee under Sub-section (2) of Section 168 of the Code is not a tenant as defined under Section 2 (y) of the Code,t as according to the definition of tenantt in Section 2 (y) of the Code, he acquires the right of an occupancy tenant. But under Section 168 (2), remains only a lessee having no statutory rights available to him as an occupancy tenant. This being the legal position, the possession of the applicants after the decision of Board of Revenue dt 30. 5. 1984 cannot be more than a trespasser and the same cannot be maintained in the eye of law. ( 7 ) IT appears that the applicants again tried to take possession of the lands in dispute upon which proceedings under Section 145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure were started and the S. D. M. after passing a preliminary order also passed an order under Section 146 of the Code for attachment of the property and appointing a receiver, against which these two revisions, have been filed by the applicants/so-called lessees. ( 8 ) SHRI P. P. Naolekar, learned counsel appearing for the non-applicant Sarvarakar raised a preliminary objection and contended that direct revision to this Court is not maintainable. True it is. Against the order of the S. D. M. , the Sessions Court, Damoh had not been moved but directly, in violation of Rule 15 of the High Court Rules contained in Chapter N. revision has been filed. True it is. Against the order of the S. D. M. , the Sessions Court, Damoh had not been moved but directly, in violation of Rule 15 of the High Court Rules contained in Chapter N. revision has been filed. Ordinarily such revisions are to be filed before the Sessions Court, save in exceptional cases. Since both the revisions have been admitted for hearing parties, no useful purpose would be served in dismissing these revisions on this score alone. Therefore, this Court has decided to decide these revisions on merits. ( 9 ) AS stated above, this case has chequered history starting from two decades ago wherein the parties have contested innings after innings in Civil Court as well as in revenue Courts and also resorted to the provisions of Section 145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. ( 10 ) LEARNED Counsel for the applicant, Shri S. C. Dan, while giving reference to the order passed by this Court in Criminal Revision No. 205/74 decided on 10/9/1974 submitted that throughout, the- land was found in possession of the applicants. The submission so made has no two opinions, as dispute between the parties arose in the year 1962, which led the Sarvarakar of the temple to file a suit and ultimately as per the direction given in Second Appeal No. 355/66 he has approached the Revenue Court which has decided the dispute in favour of the Sarvarakar of the Deity. ( 11 ) THE object of the provisions of Section 145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, in the context of the chequered history of this case, cannot be lost sight of, which contemplates that the provisions of Section 145 are meant for preventing breach of peace arising in respect of disputes relating to immovable property and, therefore, in order to achieve this object the provisions of Section 145, the S. D. M. is to settle the matter temporarily and to maintain status quo until the rights of the parties are decided by a competent court. In this respect the decision rendered by the Board of Revenue is a decision by a competent court, which is binding on the parties, as a civil suit is barred in view of the provisions of Section 257 (K) of the Code as referred to above. In this respect the decision rendered by the Board of Revenue is a decision by a competent court, which is binding on the parties, as a civil suit is barred in view of the provisions of Section 257 (K) of the Code as referred to above. ( 12 ) THE effect of the order passed by the highest revenue Court of the State on 30. 5. 1984 cannot be lost sight of in view of the provisions of sub-section (6) of Section 145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, being an order evicting the applicants from possession of the disputed lands in question and is as such a proceeding TTin due course of law, as under the facts and circumstances of the instant case, this Court in Second Appeal No. 355/66 directed the Sarvarakar to resort to the remedy available under Section 168 of the Code and the Sarvarakar on behalf of the Deity having resorted to it and got a final order from the highest Revenue Court of the State. In view thereof, it is not now necessary that there should only be an order of the Civil Court, but the Court acting under statutory authority to pass an order for possession is also recognised under subsection (6) of Section 145, Cr. P. C. The expression until evicted therefrom in due course of lawt speakst in itself that the eviction should be through a competent Court of Jurisdiction. ( 13 ) IN the instant case the dispute between the Sarvarakar and the applicants lessees is only cognizable under Section 168 of the Code, and the Civil Court has no jurisdiction as observed in the second appeal in view of the provisions of Section 257 (K) of the Code. This being so the expression used in sub-section (6) of Section 145, Cr. P. C. (until evicted therefrom in due course of law) is not confirmed to eviction by Civil Court alone. Section 257 of the Code expressly excludes the jurisdiction of the Civil Court in matters of rejectment of a lessee of a Bhumiswami under subsection (4) of Section 168. P. C. (until evicted therefrom in due course of law) is not confirmed to eviction by Civil Court alone. Section 257 of the Code expressly excludes the jurisdiction of the Civil Court in matters of rejectment of a lessee of a Bhumiswami under subsection (4) of Section 168. Therefore, the final order passed under Section 145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in earlier proceedings between the Bhumiswami and the lessee can only be set at naught by initiating proper proceedings before the Courts State provided under the Code and not before the Civil Court, which is not competent to entertain such disputes. This being so, the final order passed by the Board of Revenue referred to above would be conterminous with that of the Civil Court (See Nata Padhan v. Banchha Baral. ( 14 ) THUS, the action on the part of the applicants in taking the law in their own hands and trying to tresp4lss into the land belonging to the Deity, notwithstanding the final order of the Board of Revenue was illegal and the proceedings under Section 145, Cr. P. C. cannot be said to be bonafide and has resulted in abuse of the process of law and cannot be maintained and this Court in its revisional jurisdiction, for the facts and circumstances narrated above, is constrained to quash the entire proceedings and further directing the S. D. M. , Damoh to place the Sarvarakar in possession of the disputed property. Here it is pertinent to mention that in such cases where an order is passed in terms of sub-section (6) of Section 145, Cr. P. C. by a competent court and thereafter, repeatedly if a party is indulging in trespass and tries to take forcible possession of the property from the real owner, the authorities ,are expected to take recourse to normal procedure of apprehending those persons for committing criminal trespass or other lawful remedies available to them. ( 15 ) WITH these directions, the proceedings pending before the S. D. M. , Damoh under Section 145, Cr. P. C. are quashed. Accordingly the revisions are disposed of. Revision allowed. .