CRP 16/2011 BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE K. MERUNO IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (THE HIGH COURT OF ASSAM: NAGALAND: MEGHALAYA: MANIPUR: TRIPURA: MIZORAM & ARUNA CHAL PRADESH) GUWAHATI (1) CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO. 16 OF 2011 (2) CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO. 17 OF 2011 Smti. Ira Bhatta W/o Sri Dulai Krishna Bhatta Proprietor of M/s Sachi Paper House Bara Bazar, Das Market, Pandu, Guwahati-12. : Petitioner vs. Sri Sushil Chandra Das S/o late Nishi Kanta Das R/o Kamkhaya Colony, Pandu, Guwahati-12, Also at Bara Bazar, Das Market, Pandu, Guwahati-12. : Respondent B E F O R E THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE K. MERUNO For the Petitioner : Mr. D. Das, Sr. Adv. Mr. A. Das, Adv. For the Respondent : Mr. B.R. Dey, Sr. Adv. Mr. A.K. Paul, Adv. Date of Hearing : 07-03-2011 Date of Judgment : 22.3.2011 JUDGMENT & ORDER (CAV) 1. Heard Mr. D. Das, learned Senior counsel assisted by Mr. A. Das, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. B.R. Dey, learned Senior counsel ass isted by Mr. A.K. Paul, learned counsel appearing for the sole respondent in bot h the civil revision petitions. 2. After hearing the respective learned Senior counsels assisted by their respective junior counsels at length in both the civil revision petitions and upon perusal of the pleadings as well as the documents relied upon by the r espective parties, I have given my anxious consideration in the whole matter spe cially to the impugned orders dated 29-4-10 passed in Misc. A. No.11 of 2009 and Misc. A. No. 13 of 2009 and this Court is of the confirmed opinion that the im pugned orders dated 29-4-2010 is not an order sustainable under the law. The imp ugned orders dated 29-4-10 have been passed in a very cryptic manner without ren dering necessary findings. This Court in the case of Shikhar Chand Falodia & Anr . V. Sushil Kr. Sanganeria & Bros & Ors., 2004 (Suppl.) GLT 393, has held that a revision under Article 227 is permissible only when impugned order suffers from error of jurisdiction, patent illegality or perversity. It has also been held i n another case in Jitendra Kumar Dhar and Ors. V. Sibu Paul and Anr., 2007 (2) G LT 68, wherein necessary findings in support of its order would be jurisdictiona l error liable to correction under Article 227 of the Constitution. The present revision petition so far as it relates to the impugned orders dated 29-4-10 pass ed in Misc. A. No. 11 of 2009 and Misc. A. No.13 of 2009 have been passed in a v ery cryptic manner without rendering any necessary findings in support of its or der and therefore, in view of the decided cases of this Court cited above, the impugned orders dated 29-4-10 passed in Misc. A. No. 11 of 2009 and Misc. A. No. 13 of 2009 cannot stand the test of law and suffers from jurisdictional error, patent illegality and perverse, as such the impugned orders dated 29-4-10 passed in Misc. A. No. 11 of 2009 and Misc. A. No.13 of 2009 are hereby quashed and se t aside. 3. In the facts and circumstance of the case, no order as to costs is made. Send back lower court records forthwith. JUDGE Rj