- (1.) Petitioner is assailing the order dated 25 November 2009 passed by the revisional court/Additional District & Sessions Judge, Court No.7, Kanpur Nagar in Criminal Revision No.164/2009, arising from an order dated 27 August 2009 passed by the Additional City Magistrate VI, Kanpur Nagar, in Case No.2/12/2009 (Olive Veronica March v. Dennis Kenneth Young) in proceedings under Section 145/146 Code of Criminal Procedure (for brief, Cr.P.C.).
(2.) The third and fourth respondent filed an application under Section 145 Cr.P.C. before the second respondent-Additional City Magistrate VI, Kanpur Nagar, on 23 December 2008 regarding being dispossessed from the property in dispute, on which police report was called. Thana in-charge, Nawabganj Police Station in report dated 2 January 2009 stated that there is dispute between the petitioner and third and fourth respondent pertaining to House No.2A/47, Azad Nagar. Both the parties contend that they are owners and in possession of the disputed property, further, Suit No.1489/2000 is pending before the Court of Civil Judge (J.D.) Kanpur Nagar. The report was supported by the site map of the disputed property. The Magistrate sought further clarification which was supplied by the concerned thana on 9 March 2009 stating that House No.2A/47 & 2A/47A are one single house. Petitioner is owner of House No.2A/48. Between both the premises a small wall of 2 or 2-1/2 feet has been constructed by the petitioner and a door has been opened towards the premises in dispute by the petitioner from his House No. 2A/48. There being bone of contention between the parties, therefore, proceeding under Section 107/116 Cr.P.C. was also initiated earlier, the report further noted that land mafias are behind the parties, therefore, requested the Magistrate that receiver be appointed under Section 146 Cr.P.C. Learned Magistrate, prima facie, was of the opinion that the petitioner is resident of House No.2A/48 and is in possession of House No.2A/47.
(3.) Learned Magistrate on 10 June 2009 passed preliminary order directing the parties to appear and file their reply. Yusin Young-the fourth respondent and Charles D. Singh filed their statement on oath, oral statements of Smt. Kaushalya and Radha Raman were recorded in support of the third and fourth respondent, as well as, documentary evidence was produced. Whereas, the impugned order would note that the petitioner neither appeared nor his statement was recorded. During the course of arguments, the order-sheet of Suit No.1489/2000 (Smt. Olive Veronica v. Ms. Dorithi Kenneth Young), municipal entries of Kanpur Nagar Nigam for 1987-92 of House No.47, the tax assessment of Nagar Mahapalika, papers pertaining to House No.2A/47 were filed.;