ISHWARI PRASAD AND ORS Vs. MURARI LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned Counsel for the parties add perused the order passed by the revisional court.

(2.) I am not inclined to discuss the merits of the case as it may prejudice the case of either party. Since I intend to pass an order of remand in my opinion, the order passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, is absolutely cryptic and is not a speaking order. When the trial-court has passed a reasoned order and if he had exceeded his jurisdiction it was essential to the revisional court to have stated in this order while reversing the finding of the trial-court. It is always essential that the reasons should be assigned for setting-aside the order. In para two of the order, the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, has only stated what has mentioned in the complaint. In para three, he says, he has perused the record and took cognizance. Nothing has been mentioned as to why he considered it to be a fit case for interference.

(3.) I, therefore, deem it proper to set-aside the order and remand the case back to the revisional court. The order dated 22nd October, 1992 is set-aside and the revision petition is restored to its number.. The record of the case shall be remitted to the revisional court, who shall fix-up the date and intimate the parties of the date of hearing of the revision petition and decide the revision petition afresh. The parties are directed to appear before the Revisional Court on 10th February, 1994.