Kalyan Dutta, J. - (1.) This is an application in revision filed by Pema Ram and Bhagwan Ram against an order of the Sessions Judge, Sri Ganganagar, dated 11th January, 1975, by which the order of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Hanumangarh, dated 26 February, 1974, in a proceeding under S. 145, old Criminal Procedure Code, declaring the possession of the two petitioners on 15 Bighas of Agricultural land in Chak No. 6 KHM of village Khantawali, Tehsil Suratgarh, was set aside and the possession of Bhagirath, non-petitioner No. 1, was declared thereon at the date of the preliminary order and within two months next before it until he was evicted therefrom in due course of law. It was further ordered by the Sessions Judge that the possession of the land shall be delivered to Bhagirath and the sale proceeds of the crop shall be paid to him after deducting 10% commission.
(2.) The relevant facts giving rise to this revision-petition may be shortly stated as follows : Bhagirath presented an application under section 145, old Criminal Procedure Code in the court of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Hanumangarh. It was alleged in the application that 15 Bighas of land comprising Khasra Nos. 39/274, 38/247 situated in chak No. 7 K.H. N. of Khatnawali village was allotted to Bhagirath's brother Ram Chander, who cultivated this land in his life time. Ram Chander died in the month of October, 1970, leaving no issue behind him. and Pema Ram, Bhagwana Ram and Bhagirath only are his legal heirs. After the death of Ram Chander, Bhagirath claimed to have paid remaining price of the land amounting to Rs. 1900/-. Hence it was decided in a Panchayat of respectable persons of village Khatnawali that the land of Ram Chander deceased would remain in the possession of Bhagirath for two years in lieu of the remaining price of the land paid by him and that Bhagwana Ram and Pema Ram petitioners would not interfere with the cultivatory possession of Bhagirath during the period of two years. It was alleged that after this decision, Bhagwana Ram and Pema Ram turned dishonest and tried to get the land of the disease mutated in their names by Tahsildar, Suratgarh, in the month of September, 1972. As soon as Bhagirath came to know of their dishonest intention to grab the land, he filed an application on 30th September, 1972, before Shri Yogendra Nath Handa, M. L. A. at Suratgarh, who forwarded it to the Tahsildar, Suratgarh, for consideration and necessary action. The land of Ram Chander had been in the possession of one Lekh Ram son of Ladu Ram Jat R/o Khatnawali, with the permission of Bhagirath, Bhagwana and Pema Ram. After the decision in the Panchayat that the land would remain in the cultivatory possession of Bhagirath for two years, Lekh Ram handed over possession of the land to Bhagirath. In Samvat year 2029, Bhagirath cultivated crops of gram, Haldi etc., in it which was cut by him and his sons. On 26. 3. 1973 Bhagwana Ram and Penaa Ram accompanied by Ram Kunwar forcibly entered into the land with an intention to take away the crops and to occupy the land. Bhagirath and his sons ran away from the field out of fear of being beaten by the trespassers. As Bhagirath apprehended imminent danger of breach of the peace, he requested the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Hanumangarh, to initiate proceedings against Bhagwan and Pema Ram under S. 145., old Cr.P.C. and to pass an order of interim attachment of the land in dispute. In support of his application, Bhagirath put in his own affidavit and the affidavit of Lekh Ram. The Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Hanuman garh, was satisfied from the material on the record that a dispute likely to cause a breach of the piece existed concerning the land under controversy. He, therefore, made an order in writing stating the grounds of his being so satisfied and requiring the parties concerned in the dispute to attend his court and to put in written statements of their respective claims as regards the fact of actual possession of the subject of dispute and further calling upon them to put in such documents or to adduce by putting in affidavits the evidence of such persons as they relied upon in support of such claims. As the case was one of emergency, the learned Sub-Divisional Magistrate attached the land in dispute and appointed the Naib-Tehsildar, Suratgarh as a receiver to take the land into his possession and to make proper arrangements for its cultivation.
(3.) The parties appeared before the Sub-Divisional Magistrate and submitted written statements of their respective claims as respects the fact of actual possession of the land in dispute. They put in affidavits of their witness also along with certain documents. The Sub-Divisional Magistrate considered the entire evidence led by the parties in support of their respective claims and came to a conclusion that Pema Ram and Bhagwana were in possession of the land in dispute two months prior to the date of attachment, i. e. 9. 4. 1973. Aggrieved by this order Bhagirath filed a revision-petition in the court of the Sessions Judge, Sri Gangaugar who accepted the revision-petition and set aside the order of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate and declared the possession of Bhagirath over the land in dispute at the date of the preliminary order or within two months next before it, as stated above. Hence, Pema Ram and Bhagwana have come-up to this Court in revision.;