MAHESH KHIRWAL Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) Grievance of the petitioner is against the part of the order dated 16th November, 2006 as well as revisional order dated 3rd May, 2007. By order dated 26th November, 2006, the proceeding under Sec. 144 Criminal Procedure Code was dropped and it was ordered that the possession may be handed over to the opposite party i.e., the respondents in the writ petition. The writ petitioner preferred a revision petition being Criminal Revision no. 233 of 2006 in the court of Sessions Judge, East Singhbhum, Jamshedpur, which was dismissed by the revisional court and hence this writ petition.

(3.) Learned counsel for the writ petitioner submitted that both the courts below committed serious error of law in handing over possession to the respondents and learned counsel for the petitioner drew my attention to the various documents and also submitted that even the alleged Power of Attorney appears to be forged one, which has been set up by the respondents before the first court. Learned counsel for the petitioner also submitted that the neighbours lodged a complaint for demolition of house because the house in question was in dilapidated condition, wherein the authority found that the writ petitioner was in possession since his grand father's time.