Skip to content


Mamidapalli Sattayya and ors. Vs. Sankara Kutumbara Rao and ors. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectProperty
CourtChennai
Decided On
Reported inAIR1928Mad859; 108Ind.Cas.904
AppellantMamidapalli Sattayya and ors.
RespondentSankara Kutumbara Rao and ors.
Excerpt:
- .....of mr. suryanarayana is that the magistrate having found that there was no likelihood of a breach of peace, he had no jurisdiction to pass an order that the lands under dispute should continue in the custody and management of the receiver. the jurisdiction of the magistrate to proceed under section 145, criminal p.c., is derived from the fact that he is satisfied that there is a likelihood of a. breach of peace and the moment it is found that there is no likelihood of a. breach of peace, his jurisdiction to proceed under section 145 ceases, and the order for attachment is only pending the enquiry under section 145, and when the proceedings are dropped because of the absence of a likelihood of a breach of peace the order for attachment automatically comes to an end. in this case.....
Judgment:
ORDER

Devadoss, J.

1. This is a petition to revise the order of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate of Nidadavole. The contention of Mr. Suryanarayana is that the Magistrate having found that there was no likelihood of a breach of peace, he had no jurisdiction to pass an order that the lands under dispute should continue in the custody and management of the receiver. The jurisdiction of the Magistrate to proceed under Section 145, Criminal P.C., is derived from the fact that he is satisfied that there is a likelihood of a. breach of peace and the moment it is found that there is no likelihood of a. breach of peace, his jurisdiction to proceed under Section 145 ceases, and the order for attachment is only pending the enquiry under Section 145, and when the proceedings are dropped because of the absence of a likelihood of a breach of peace the order for attachment automatically comes to an end. In this case after finding that there was no likelihood of a breach of peace the Magistrate following: some decision of the Nagpur Court, thought it fit to continue the attachment and the custody of the property in the hands of the receiver. He had no jurisdiction to do that, the proceedings under Section 145 having been dropped the Magistrate should have directed the receiver appointed by him, to hand over the property to the person from whom possession was taken. The order relating to continuance of the attachment and the management of the receiver is hereby cancelled. The Magistrate is directed to pass an order to hand over the property to the person from whom it was taken.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //