ISHAN CHANDRA DAS,J. - (1.) Heard learned Counsel for both the parties.
(2.) This common judgement is governing both the revisional applications, being C.O. 3061 of 2014 and C.O. 3060 of 2014, the subject matter of both the revisional applications, orders impugned are identical and the parties to the proceedings being almost identical.
(3.) In C.O. 3060 of 2014, the propriety of the order dated 21st December, 2000 passed by the learned 1st Court of Additional District Judge, Hooghly in Misc. Appeal No. 44 of 1992 was called in question by the present petitioner whereas the C.O. 3061 of 2014 has been filed questioning the correctness of the order dated 22nd December, 2000 in Misc. Appeal No. 45 of 1992 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Hooghly.;