In Brief
Gandhe Vijay Kumar challenged a High Court judgment that had set aside concurrent findings by the Rent Controller and Appellate Authority regarding his bonafide requirement to occupy a rented property. The Supreme Court held that the High Court erred by re-appreciating evidence in its revisional jurisdiction as if it were an appellate court. Revisional jurisdiction is limited to examining whether findings are legally sound or perverse; it does not permit re-hearing the evidence merely because an alternative interpretation is possible. The Court restored the lower courts' orders and granted the tenant until March 2018 to vacate the property.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.