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

1965 Supreme(Raj) 91

BHARGAVA
Hemdan – Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
R.S. Parihar, for Petitioner; H.M. Parakh, for Opposite party No. 3; A.R. Mehta, for State

BHARGAVA, J.—This reference by the learned District Magistrate, Jalore arises out of proceedings under sec. 145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

2. On a report by the Station House Officer, Bagora that a dispute regarding possession over Khasra Nos. 681, 675 and 688 in village Nadia between Party A and Party B was likely to cause a breach of the peace, the learned Sub-divisional Magistrate drew up a preliminary order on 22nd August, 1963. He called upon the parties to file their written statements and to produce evidence in support of their respective claims. Accordingly both parties filed documents and affidavits in support of their claims and the learned Sub-Divisional Magistrate on its consideration declared party B in possession of the disputed land and forbade party A from interfering with the possession of party B unless so ordered by a competent court.

3. Aggrieved by this order party A filed a revision application in the court of the District Magistrate, Jalore. Two points were urged in that court:

(1) that the affidavits submitted by party B were inadmissible as they were attested by a Third Class Magistrate.

(2) that the Sub-Divisional Magistrate was in error in deputing th
























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