Back
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT, (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
DEVASHIS BARUAH
Nipan Goswami, S/o. Late Umesh Ch. Goswami – Appellant
Versus
On The Death Of Prafulla Deka His Legal Heirs – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(DEVASHIS BARUAH, J.)
Heard Mr. A. Sattar, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner. Mr. R. Ali, the learned counsel appears on behalf of the respondents.
2. The present proceedings has been filed by invoking the revisional jurisdiction of this Court under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short, “the Code”) challenging the judgment and decree dated 23.04.2018 passed in Title Appeal No. 21/2017 by the learned Court of the Civil Judge, Nalbari (hereinafter referred to as, “the learned First Appellate Court”) thereby setting aside the judgment and decree dated 16.08.2017 passed by the learned Court of the Munsiff No. 1, Nalbari (hereinafter referred to as, “the learned Trial Court”) in T.S. Case No. 46/2015, as a result, the appeal filed by the respondents herein was allowed, and a decree for eviction was passed against the petitioner herein.
3. At the outset, taking into account that the revisional jurisdiction of this Court has been invoked, let this Court therefore take note of the scope of the said jurisdiction.
4. For the purpose of deciding, as to whether, this Court should exercise its revisional jurisdiction against the impugned ju
The court emphasized that revisional jurisdiction does not allow for reevaluation of factual findings unless they are clearly erroneous or unjust, affirming the original findings of bona fide require....
The court upheld that factual findings by lower courts are not subject to re-evaluation unless proven perverse, emphasizing the tenant's consistent rent default.
The court upheld the findings of fact regarding tenant default and bona fide requirement, allowing the tenant to retain possession under specific conditions until a set date.
The tenant's obligation to provide evidence for rent payment is essential; failure results in judicial affirmation of eviction due to non-payment.
The court clarified that revisional jurisdiction does not permit reappraisal of evidence, affirming the lower courts' findings on bona fide requirement and rent default.
Revisional jurisdiction cannot re-evaluate facts but ensures lower court decisions are free from legal errors; findings of default in rent by the defendant upheld.
Petitioners to continue in possession of suit premises till 30.04.2022 is based upon undertaking of petitioners to vacate suit premises within said period and if petitioner fails to adhere to same, R....
In a suit where the plaintiff alleges that the defendant defaulted in payment of rent, it is the burden of the defendant to prove that there was no default committed by the defendant, who is the tena....
The court established that revisional jurisdiction under Section 115 of the CPC is confined to jurisdictional errors, and findings of fact by lower courts cannot be disturbed unless they are perverse....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
