https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=189591 The Supreme Court criticized the High Court for improperly exercising writ jurisdiction, leading to the tenant's eviction without due process. The appeal court failed to provide relief to the appellant initially but later directed the appellant's restoration to possession after setting aside the writ court's order. The Supreme Court emphasized the duty of the appeal court to ensure justice by verifying facts, identifying the appellant, and ordering the restoration to possession. Respondents were instructed to pay costs to the appellant as assessed by the Court. en-us Tue, 26 Mar 1996 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 13 Jan 2017 14:12:18 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=189591 The Supreme Court criticized the High Court for improperly exercising writ jurisdiction, leading to the tenant's eviction without due process. The appeal court failed to provide relief to the appellant initially but later directed the appellant's restoration to possession after setting aside the writ court's order. The Supreme Court emphasized the duty of the appeal court to ensure justice by verifying facts, identifying the appellant, and ordering the restoration to possession. Respondents were instructed to pay costs to the appellant as assessed by the Court. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 26 Mar 1996 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=189591