Mir Dara Sheko, J.

The revisional application being C.O. 903 of 2005 under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been directed against the order dated 18.12.2004 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court, Dinhata in Miscellaneous Appeal (P) No.8 of 2003 confirming the order of pre-emption dated 15.7.2003 passed by learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Dinhata in Misc. (Pre-emption) Case No.14 of 1995.

2. Heard learned advocate, Mr. Sukanta Roy and learned Senior Advocate Mr. Partha Sarathi Bhattacharya assisted by Mr. Raju Bhattacharya.

3. Mr. Roy representing the petitioner/appellant/pre-emptee opposite of the mis pre-emption case assailed of the judgment of the appellate court on the grounds that learned appellate court failed to consider that the pre-emption case ought to have been failed for unidenticality of the case plot since in the deed no. 10590 dated 20th July, 1977 on the basis of which the opposite party/respondent/pre-emptor/petitioner of the pre-emption case claimed pre-emption in respect of the property mentioned in the schedule of the application as co-sharer and adjoining land order does not bear the number of the impugned cas