Gauhati High Court
Bhupendra Kumar Das vs Anima Prava Das on 10 May, 2023
Page No.# 1/3
GAHC010095472022
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : Review.Pet./91/2022
BHUPENDRA KUMAR DAS
S/O SRI LAKSHI KANTA DAS,
RESIDENT OF HOUSE NO. 8, PIYOLI PHUKAN ROAD, REHABARI,
GUWAHATI 781008,DIST KAMRUP M ASSAM
VERSUS
ANIMA PRAVA DAS
W/O SRI BHABEN CHANDRA DAS,
RESIDENT OF K.C SEN ROAD, SOLAPARA, PALTAN BAZAR, PS PALTAN
BAZAR GUWAHATI 781008, KAMRUP M ASSAM
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. K N CHOUDHURY
Advocate for the Respondent : MR H K SARMA (r-1)
:: BEFORE ::
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHIVJYOTI SAIKIA
O R D E R
10.05.2023
Heard Mr. K.N. Choudhury, learned senior counsel appearing for the
petitioner. Also heard Mr. H.K. Sarma, the learned counsel representing
the respondent.
Page No.# 2/3
2. This is an application under Order 47 Rule 1 and 2 of the Civil
Procedure praying for review of the judgment and order dated
28.04.2022 passed by this Court in Civil Revision Petition No.83 of 2019.
3. The respondent filed the Title Suit being T.S. No.307 of 2012 against
the present petitioner praying for his ejectment from the suit premises. The
trial court decreed the suit in favour of the respondent. The first appellate
court dismissed the appeal.
4. The present petitioner filed the revision petition no.CRP 83 of 2019
under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure challenging the
judgment and order dated 07.05.2019 passed by the appellate court of
Civil Judge No.1, Kamrup (M), Guwahati. This Court dismissed the revision
petition.
5. The learned senior counsel Mr. Choudhury has pointed out that the
appellate court judgment is not in terms of law as laid down in Order 41
Rule 31 of the Code of Civil Procedure because the appellate court
failed to frame a point for consideration.
6. Per contra, Mr. Sarma has supported the appellate court judgment.
7. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsels of
both sides.
8. At this stage, a brief visit to Order 41 Rule 31 of the Code of Civil
Procedure would be fruitful. It reads as under:
"The judgment of the Appellate Court shall be in writing and shall state-
(a) the points for determination;
(b) the decision thereon;
(c) the reasons for the decision; and
Page No.# 3/3
(d) where the decree appealed from is reversed or varied, the relief to which
the appellant is entitled, and shall at the time that it is pronounced be signed
and dated by the Judge or by the Judges concurring therein."
9. So, it is clear that the appellate court should have framed a point for
consideration. The appellate court did not do so. Therefore, such an
appellate court judgment is bad in law.
10. While disposing of CRP No.83/2019, this fact somehow escaped the
eyes of this Court. It is an error committed by this Court. The error is
apparent on the face of the record. Therefore, the present review
petition is maintainable in law.
11. Accordingly, the review petition is allowed. The judgment of the
appellate court of Civil Judge No.1 Kamrup (M) at Guwahati in T.A. No.7
of 2017 is bad in law and is set aside on account of non-compliance of
the provision of law as laid down in Order 41 Rule 31 of the CPC.
12. The appellate court is directed to pass a fresh judgment complying
with the provision of Order 41 Rule 31 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
The review petition is disposed of.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
