SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1981 Supreme(SC) 177

A.N.SEN, A.V.VARADARAJAN, S.MURTAZA FAZAL ALI
Bholaram – Appellant
Versus
Ameerchand – Respondent


Judgment

FAZAL ALI, J. :- This appeal by special leave by the defendant is directed against a judgment dated July 21, 1971 of the Madhya Pradesh High Court by which the High Court interfered in second appeal and after having set aside the findings of fact by the trial Court and the appellate Court decreed the plaintiffs suit for ejectment. We have gone through the judgment of the High Court as also of the courts below and we find that by and large the High Court seems to have reversed the concurrent findings of fact arrived at by the trial Court and the appellate Court and, therefore, prima facie travelled beyond the limits imposed on its jurisdiction under S. 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The High Court, however, seems to have justified its interference in second appeal mainly on the ground that the judgements of the courts below were perverse and were given in utter disregard of the important materials on the record particularly misconstruction of the rent note. Even if we accept the main reason given by the High Court the utmost that could be said was that the findings of fact by the courts below were wrong or grossly inexcusable but that by itself would not entitle the Hig
























Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top