https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=174091 Writ jurisdiction under Articles 226 and 227 can be used to correct a Special Court's decision under the Andhra Pradesh Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act, 1982 where material evidence is ignored, misread, or the decision-making process suffers from manifest error causing gross injustice. The Special Court's findings are not to be reappreciated as an appellate matter, but interference is justified on legality of process. On the facts, the respondents were not treated as land grabbers because their possession was traced to a lawful source of title supported by documentary records, and absence from some revenue entries was not decisive. en-us Tue, 14 Oct 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 09 Dec 2015 11:08:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=174091 Writ jurisdiction under Articles 226 and 227 can be used to correct a Special Court's decision under the Andhra Pradesh Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act, 1982 where material evidence is ignored, misread, or the decision-making process suffers from manifest error causing gross injustice. The Special Court's findings are not to be reappreciated as an appellate matter, but interference is justified on legality of process. On the facts, the respondents were not treated as land grabbers because their possession was traced to a lawful source of title supported by documentary records, and absence from some revenue entries was not decisive. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 14 Oct 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=174091