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

1956 Supreme(All) 410

H. P. ASTHANA
Ram Eqbal Pandey – Appellant
Versus
Mahant Ram Nath Gir – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
Rama Shankar Pd, For the Appellant / B.N. Sapru, For the Respondent

JUDGMENT

H.P. Asthana, J. - This revision arises out of a case u/s 145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Triloki pande and others, hereinafter called first party, made an application u/s 145 Code of Criminal Procedure that they were in possession of certain plots and that the opposite parties wanted to dispossess them from these plots forcibly and on account of it there was an apprehension of the breach of the peace. These plots were attached and a preliminary order was passed by the learned Magistrate directing the parties concerned to file their written statements with regard to their possession. Both the parties alleged their possession over these plots. The learned Magistrate recorded some evidence in this case but before he could conclude the enquiry a suit was filed by the opposite party in the revenue court for a declaration that they were in possession of these plots as khudkasht holders. The trial court decided that case in favour of the opposite parties. A copy of this judgment was filed before the learned Magistrate. He therefore recorded some further evidence in the case and ultimately decided it on the basis of the judgment of the revenue court without applying his min

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