https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=289785 Revision under Section 115 CPC was held maintainable against an appellate decree where the decree finally disposed of the suit and no second appeal lay because Section 102 CPC barred it. The Court rejected the view that revisional power is limited to interlocutory orders. It also held that revisional interference may extend to perverse findings where material evidence is ignored or misread. On the evidence, the plaintiff's title and entrustment were supported by documentary and oral material, while the appellate court's contrary findings were found unsupported. The revision succeeded, the appellate judgment was set aside, and the trial court decree with money relief and interest was restored. en-us Fri, 11 Feb 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 22 Aug 2020 00:23:17 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=289785 Revision under Section 115 CPC was held maintainable against an appellate decree where the decree finally disposed of the suit and no second appeal lay because Section 102 CPC barred it. The Court rejected the view that revisional power is limited to interlocutory orders. It also held that revisional interference may extend to perverse findings where material evidence is ignored or misread. On the evidence, the plaintiff's title and entrustment were supported by documentary and oral material, while the appellate court's contrary findings were found unsupported. The revision succeeded, the appellate judgment was set aside, and the trial court decree with money relief and interest was restored. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 11 Feb 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=289785