AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Prashant Kumar
This application has been filed for quashing the order dated 26th of June 2007 passed by 2nd Additional District and Sessions Judge, Singhbhum West at Chaibasa in Criminal Revision No. 63 of 2006, whereby revision application of petitioners was dismissed on contest.
It is submitted by Sri Bhaiya Viswajeet Kumar, Learned Counsel for petitioners that learned court below had not considered the finding of learned Munsif in Title Suit No. 12 of 1997, whereby right, title, interest and possession of petitioners was declared over the suit land. Thus impugned order cannot be sustained.
Mr. Nilesh Kumar, Learned Counsel for opposite parties submits that earlier suit was filed by petitioners against one Shashi Bhushan Samad and others, who purchased landed property from mother of Namsi Kui (opposite party no. 2). Thus right, title and interest of petitioners was declared holding that defendant number 1 of that case has no title over the land on the basis of sale deed number 2236 dated 17.06.1982, because under the ''Ho'' community, a female has no right to transfer the property.
Admittedly, Namsi Kui (opposite party no. 2) was not party in the aforesaid suit. It is also an admitted fact that she came in possession of land after the death of her father. However it is contended by Learned Counsel for petitioners that after marriage she has no right to continue in possession of the land in question as parties are govern by the custom of ''Ho'' community. From perusal of impugned order, I find that learned Executive Magistrate had framed an issue in this respect and given a finding that said issue required to be adjudicated by a civil court, because it relates to declaration of right, title and interest of parties after consideration of their customary law. The Revisional Court had considered aforesaid finding of the court below and had approved the same by saying that in a proceeding u/s 145 of the Cr. P.C. Executive Magistrate has no power to declare right, title and interest of a party on the basis of customary law. I find no illegality in the said finding of the Revisional Court.
Thus there is no merit in this application. Same is accordingly dismissed.