https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183511 In supervisory jurisdiction under Articles 226 and 227, the High Court cannot reappreciate evidence or act as an appellate court against a reasoned factual finding unless there is patent legal error, perversity, or jurisdictional infirmity. The appellate authority had found the landlords' bona fide requirement genuine and comparative hardship in their favour on evidence, while the Prescribed Authority relied on irrelevant considerations. Those factual findings were not shown to be perverse, and no concrete material established the tenant's inability to obtain alternative accommodation. Interference with the eviction order was therefore unwarranted. en-us Thu, 11 Sep 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 11 Jun 2016 12:51:42 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183511 In supervisory jurisdiction under Articles 226 and 227, the High Court cannot reappreciate evidence or act as an appellate court against a reasoned factual finding unless there is patent legal error, perversity, or jurisdictional infirmity. The appellate authority had found the landlords' bona fide requirement genuine and comparative hardship in their favour on evidence, while the Prescribed Authority relied on irrelevant considerations. Those factual findings were not shown to be perverse, and no concrete material established the tenant's inability to obtain alternative accommodation. Interference with the eviction order was therefore unwarranted. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 11 Sep 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183511