- (1.) This revision petition is directed against order dated 11-12-1991 passed by Sri O. N. Singh, Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Sadar, Mirzapur in case No. 12 of 1983/1/91 under Section 145, Cr. P.C. holding possession and title of the respondents on the land in dispute and releasing the same in their favour.
(2.) The dispute is with respect to Chak No. 71 constituted out of plots Nos. 114, 124-A, 124-B and 113 situate in village Bidauli district Mirzapur, and Chak No. 20 constituted of plots Nos. 112 and 114/240 of the same village.
(3.) Admittedly, this property belonged to one Mahavir, deceased. Smt. Gujrati was alleged to be the widow of Mahavir. According to party No. 1, Smt. Tulsa Devi, Gujrati wife of Mahavir absconded and she was not traced out and, therefore, she being her niece came in possession of the said property as lawful heir, whereas party No. 2, Amar Nath and another, alleged to be lawful owner and in possession of the said property having purchased the same from Smt. Gujrati by a legal sale deed for lawful consideration. As there was apprehension of breachof peace between the parties for the said piece of land proceedings under Section 145, Cr. P.C. were initiated on the report of Station Officer of the police station concerned. Sri. G. S. Tripathi, Sub Divisional Magistrate Sadar, Mirzapur in case No. 12 of 1983 under Section 145, Cr. P.C. passes an order on 1-7-1983 against which party No. 1 Smt. Tulasa Devi, filed a criminal revision No. 1287 of 1983 in this Court and Hon'ble Mr. Justice V. P. Mathur heard the said revision and by his order dated 10-8-1988 remanded back the case for fresh decision on merits observing that : "In my opinion, it is a fit case which should go back to the learned Magistrate for re-decision on merits. Consequently, the revision is allowed and the order dated 1-7-83 passed by Sri G. L. Tripathi, Sub Divisional Magistrate, Sadar, Mirzapur, is set aside. The case shall go back to the Magistrate concerned for re-decision according to law. The parties shall be free to adduce oral and documentary evidence on the question of possession on the date of passing of the preliminary order and two months prior to it. The question of title may also be incidentally looked into. If the parties so like, the evidence already on record may be read and then the question of possession shall be decided at an early date."In persuance of that order the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Sadar, Mirzapur, Sri O. N. Singh, reheard the parties and allowed the parties to produce on record various documents and to lead any further evidence and after hearing the parties passed the impugned order 11-2-1991, whereby he held party No. 2, Amar Nath and another, to be in possession of the land in dispute having title over it.;