https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166627 In landlord-tenant disputes, a revisional court cannot ordinarily reappreciate evidence to displace a concurrent finding of exclusive possession and sub-letting when that finding is supportable on the record. The Court held that revisional jurisdiction under the Rent Act is wider than section 115 CPC but still does not permit the court to act as a first or second appellate forum. It further held that the true nature of an arrangement depends on substance, not the label of licence; where the alleged occupiers were in exclusive possession and the surrounding evidence supported consideration for occupation, sub-letting could be inferred. The eviction order was therefore restored. en-us Tue, 09 Aug 1988 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 16 Feb 2026 14:40:24 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166627 In landlord-tenant disputes, a revisional court cannot ordinarily reappreciate evidence to displace a concurrent finding of exclusive possession and sub-letting when that finding is supportable on the record. The Court held that revisional jurisdiction under the Rent Act is wider than section 115 CPC but still does not permit the court to act as a first or second appellate forum. It further held that the true nature of an arrangement depends on substance, not the label of licence; where the alleged occupiers were in exclusive possession and the surrounding evidence supported consideration for occupation, sub-letting could be inferred. The eviction order was therefore restored. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 09 Aug 1988 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166627