Order This is purely a dispute between two private persons, the landlord and his tenant. Over this dispute it is admitted that a civil suit has already been filed and the suit is in progress. The landlord alleges that the tenant appellant No. 1 is allowing the appellant No. 2 to stay with him and that this is a mere manoeuvre to let him in as sub-tenant. This may be so or may not be so, but this is a question which we do not propose to decide here. But we fail to understand how in spite of and over such a dispute the Magistrate can ever assume jurisdiction under Section 144 Cr. P.C. and passed the order. The learned judge and this we say with all respect, while passing his order failed to notice that the order of the Magistrate which was the basis for the writ proceeding before him was liable to be set aside and not to be proceeded with any further. We are also fully satisfied that not only the jurisdiction of the Magistrate but the jurisdiction of the writ court was also wrongly invoked even though the order passed by the writ court may not severely affect the appellant. This however is a question of jurisdiction and we are satisfied that neither the Magistrate under Section 144 Cr. P.C. nor the learned Judge in writ Jurisdiction ought to have enteretained this matter. 2. We accordingly treat the appeal as on day's list for hearing and allow this appeal and set aside the order of the learned Judge and also the order of the learned Magistrate. We however make no order as to costs. We however make it clear that nothing stated in the order of ours should any way be considered as an expression of opinion on our part in the matter in dispute. Let xerox copies of this order be given to the learned Advocates for the parties on the usual terms. Appeal allowed; Order of the trial court and of the Magistrate set aside.