https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=193252 A provisional order under section 145 CrPC is only a temporary measure to maintain peace and determine interim possession; it does not confer title or lawful possession, so it cannot defeat an ejectment suit under section 180 of the U.P. Tenancy Act. The concurrent finding that the occupiers were not hereditary tenants was not reopened, because the challenged revenue material was not proved as genuine and the alleged presumption from a certified copy was in any event rebuttable. The plea of abatement under rule 5 of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Rules also failed, since no operative stay subsisted and the rule did not apply on the recorded findings. en-us Fri, 24 Apr 1959 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 20 Jul 2017 17:44:12 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=193252 A provisional order under section 145 CrPC is only a temporary measure to maintain peace and determine interim possession; it does not confer title or lawful possession, so it cannot defeat an ejectment suit under section 180 of the U.P. Tenancy Act. The concurrent finding that the occupiers were not hereditary tenants was not reopened, because the challenged revenue material was not proved as genuine and the alleged presumption from a certified copy was in any event rebuttable. The plea of abatement under rule 5 of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Rules also failed, since no operative stay subsisted and the rule did not apply on the recorded findings. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 24 Apr 1959 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=193252