CRIMINAL MISC. M NO.55072 OF 2007 :{ 1 } IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH DATE OF DECISION: NOVEMBER 10,2008 Ranjit Kaur and others .....Petitioners VERSUS Mahanbir Singh ....Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RANJIT SINGH 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgement? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? PRESENT: Mr. M. S. Khaira, Sr.Advocate with Mr. Dharminder Singh, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr. B. S. Saini, Advocate, for the respondent. **** RANJIT SINGH, J. The petitioners have impugned order dated 30.11.2007 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Moga, setting-aside the order passed by Sub Divisional Magistrate, Nihal Singh Wala, appointing Receiver regarding the land in dispute. The facts, in brief, are that on 5.5.2006 SHO, Police Station Badnikalan, filed a calendra under Section 145 Cr.P.C. between Natha Singh, Ranjit Kaur, Sukhjit Kaur, Baljit Kaur. being one party and Mahanbir Singh, being a second party. Natha Singh CRIMINAL MISC. M NO.55072 OF 2007 :{ 2 } had five sons and three daughters. He owned 32 killas of land. Natha Singh affected family partition amongst his sons, his handicapped daughter, Baljit Kaur, his wife and himself. There being 8 co-sharers, each got 4 killas of land. Mahanbir Singh son of Natha Singh purchased share of one of his brothers and also purchased another killa of land from another brother. Wife of Natha Singh executed a will regarding 4 killa of her land in favour of her married daughters, Ranjit Kaur and Sukhjit Kaur. Mahanbir Singh challenged this will by way of a civil suit. Ultimately, the civil suit came before this High Court by way of Regular Second Appeal and this Court, on 22.3.1999, passed the following order:- “After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, order dated 13.2.97 restraining the respondent from alienating the suit property is made absolute. Admittedly, the respondents moved the application for partition of the same. The partition proceedings may go on and the parties who have been in possession of the suit property, shall remain possession until further orders.” This Regular Second Appeal was filed by Natha Singh, who is no more. He has also left a registered will bequeathing his property to the petitioners. It is accordingly claimed that possession of the property would be deemed to have passed on to the petitioners and attempt my Mahanbir Singh to take forcibly possession of the land in dispute has genuinely raised an apprehension of breach of peace and as such, the action of the Sub Divisional Magistrate for initiating proceedings under Section 145 Cr.P.C is justified. Considering that this can lead to breach of peace, CRIMINAL MISC. M NO.55072 OF 2007 :{ 3 } respondent, Mahanbir Singh, challenged this order before the Additional Sessions Judge, Moga, who has now set-aside this order by observing that proceedings under Section 145 Cr.P.C can not be continued when the matter is already pending before a Civil Court. Reference is made to the order passed by this Court and reproduced above where respondents were restrained from alienating the suit property. Partition proceedings are also statedly pending. Thus, it is observed that the order appointing the Receiver is against the spirit of the order passed by this Court. Another civil suit is also pending before the Court of Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Moga. Noticing that it is mentioned in the calendra itself, Natha Singh had given possession of specific portion of the land to his legal heirs on account of family partition and the fact that Ramandip Singh and others had filed a suit for possession to the extent of 1/5th share, which was dismissed by the Lower Court and against which the Regular Second Appeal is pending, the Additional Sessions Judge has set-aside said order passed under Section 145 Cr.P.C. Mr.M.S.Khaira, learned Senior counsel appearing for the petitioners, would say that the pendency of the R.S.A has got no relevance as Mahanbir Singh is attempting to take a forceful possession of the land and the proceedings in the R.S.A would not have any effect as Mahanbir Singh is a party just being son of Natha Singh. The counsel representing the respondent, however, would refer to Mahant Ram Saran Dass Vs. Harish Mohan and another , 2001 (1) PLJ 106, to say that Magistrate is not entitled to initiate proceedings under Section 145 Cr.P.C and pass an order appointing Receiver, when the Civil Court, being in cession of the matter, can CRIMINAL MISC. M NO.55072 OF 2007 :{ 4 } grant any appropriate relief and a person, who is even not a party, will not alter this situation in any manner as he can also obtain any relief in the pending civil suit. Once the matter is before a civil court and even this Court is seized of the same, the parties are required to maintain the position as has been directed by the orders passed by the Civil Court. Action in appointing a Receiver under such circumstances may lead to violation of the position as may be in existence on account of the orders passed in the civil suit. Even if some dispute arises in such a situation, the party can always approach the Civil Court for an appropriate relief, where the suit is pending and action of the S.D.M in appointing Receiver during the pendency of civil proceedings can not be held justified. Even if no relief is claimed against Mahanbir Singh in the suit, it would not alter the situation as held in Mahant Ram Saran Dass (supra) and he can always seek the relevant relief in the civil proceedings which are pending. I do not find any infirmity in the view taken by the Additional Sessions Judge, Moga. The present petition as such, is dismissed. November 10,2008 ( RANJIT SINGH ) khurmi JUDGE