Satyanarayan Mandal And Others vs Chandrika Devi And Others
2025 Latest Caselaw 2149 Jhar

Jharkhand High Court

Satyanarayan Mandal And Others vs Chandrika Devi And Others on 30 January, 2025

Author: Anubha Rawat Choudhary

Bench: Anubha Rawat Choudhary

                IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

                             Second Appeal No. 190 of 2020

            Satyanarayan Mandal and Others          ...     ...     Appellants
                                   Versus
            Chandrika Devi and Others          ...      ...       Respondents
                                   ---

CORAM :HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY

---

            For the Appellants     : Mr. Rahul Kumar Gupta, Advocate
            For the Respondents    :
                                   ---

10/30.01.2025          Heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants.

2. Learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that the second appeal has been filed against judgment of affirmation and the appellants are the defendants in the case. He submits that the cause of action to file the suit was an order passed under section 145 of Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as Cr.P.C.). and the possession with respect to the property was in dispute. He has also referred to the relief prayed for in the suit and he has submitted that the order passed under section 145 of Cr.P.C. and its impact with regard to possession was directly and substantially in issue and a specific relief to that effect was also prayed for in the suit.

3. The learned counsel further submits that the learned trial Court decided the possession in favour of the plaintiffs but so far as the appellate Court is concerned, the learned First Appellate Court has completely discarded consideration of the order passed under section 145 of Cr.P.C. by stating that it has no evidentiary value. He submits that the order passed under section 145 of Cr.P.C. has evidentiary value so far as the possession is concerned, though it may not be a conclusive proof of possession. He submits that the impugned judgment passed by the learned First Appellate Court calls for interference by framing a substantial question of law with regard to non-consideration of the order passed under section 145 of Cr.P.C. He proposes that the following substantial question of law be framed in this case:

"Whether the learned First Appellate Court has committed grave error of law in holding that the order passed under section 145 Cr.P.C. in connection with possession has no evidentiary value?"

4. Considering the submissions, this appeal is admitted on the aforesaid substantial question of law.

5. Let notice be issued to the respondents for which requisites etc. under ordinary process be filed by 07th February 2025.

6. Let the records be called for from the learned Court concerned.

7. Post this case on 18th March 2025.

8. It will be open to the parties to refer to any other substantial question of law which may arise for consideration in this case upon receipt of records from the learned Court concerned.

9. Let this order be communicated to the learned Court concerned through 'FAX'.

(Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.) Pankaj