SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1966 Supreme(Pat) 113

RAMRATNA SINGH, ANWAR AHMAD
Sahdev Mandal – Appellant
Versus
Honga Murmu – Respondent


Judgment

1. This application in revision is directed against an order of a magistrate dated the 9th June, 1065 by which he declared in a proceeding under Sec.145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the second party to be in possession of the disputed land and directed the first party not to go over that land. The petitioners in this court constituted the members of the first party and the opposite party constituted the members of the second party in the proceeding under Sec.145 of the Code. This application in revision was placed before Mr. Justice Anant Singh who while admitting the application was pleased to observe that, in view of the decision of Mahapatra J. in Abdul Sayeed Khan V/s. Jagarnath Nonia, 1965 BLJR 427 this application be heard by a Division Bench. Accordingly the case has been placed before us.

2. The practice of this court has always been that a person aggrieved by the final order of a Magistrate in a proceeding under Sec.145, Code of Criminal Procedure has to go to the court of session in the first instance and request that court to make a reference to this court, if it is satisfied that the impugned order requires interference by this court, and when the Court of








Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top