AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
3 paragraphs · 218 wordsI.S.Tiwana, J. (Oral)
The only crucial point to be decided in these proceedings under section 145, Crl.P.C. is as to which of two parties is in possession of the disputed shops. It is not denied before me that by now the Civil Court, vide its judgment dated 2.11.1986, has held that the present petitioners are in actual possession of the shops, in dispute, though the suit of the plaintiffrespondent Tarsem Lal has been decreed against the petitioners. The petitioners have already preferred an appeal against the said judgment and decree of the trial Court, which is still pending. It is also not in dispute that these civil proceedings were initiated by the plaintiffrespondent on 11.5.1983, i.e. before the commencement of the present proceedings under section 145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. In the light of the above facts, it is patent that the present proceedings cannot continue any further for the simple reason that the parties to the dispute are already litigating in the civil Court and the decision of the Court is going to be binding on them. I, therefore, quash these proceedings and direct the parties to get their claims settled from the civil Court and abide by the final decree passed by the said Court. This petition thus stands disposed of.
Proceedings quashed.