JUDGMENT

1. These two rules have arisen out of an order passed by the Sub Divisional Magistrate of Tangall, on the 21st May 1906, in a proceeding under sec. 145 of the Code. The Sub-Divisional Magistrate could not determine who was in actual possession of the subject-matter of the, dispute and passed an order under sec. 146 of the Code. But curiously enough he states in the last part of his judgment "It will not be necessary to appoint a Receiver for the garh as the next felling will take place 20 years hence" that is to say, the felling of the gazarl trees which apparently were the subject-matter of the dispute between the parties. How the Magistrate could come on the facts to the conclusion that there was a likelihood of the breach of the peace which would justify the institution of proceedings under see. 145 It Is difficult for us to understand. The subject-matter of the dispute was not capable at the time of being a subject which could give rise to a breach of the peace and not for the next 20 years.

2. The police-report on which the proceeding under sec 145 is based states. In the vaguest, terms that each party claims a certain right, and that inasmuch as both the parties are me