JAGATSINH FATEHSINH Vs. PARVATIBEN HARISHCHANDRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a Civil Revision Application under section 29(2) of the Bombay Rent Act at the instance of the original defendant-tenant.

(2.) The present revision arises under section 29(2) of the Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947, wherein the jurisdiction of this Court is extremely limited. The Supreme Court has laid down the scope and powers of the High Court while entertaining such revisions under section 29(2) of the Bombay Rent Act. The Supreme Court in the case of Patel Valmik Himatlal & Ors. Vs. Patel Mohanlal Muljibhai (1998(2) GLH 736) = AIR 1998 SC 3325), while approving and reiterating the principles laid down in its earlier decision in the case of Helper Girdharbhai Vs. Saiyad Mohmad Mirasaheb Kadri ( AIR 1987 SC 1782), held that High Court cannot function as a court of appeal, cannot appreciate the evidence on record, cannot discard concurrent findings of fact based on evidence recorded by the courts below, and cannot interfere on grounds of inadequacy or insufficiency of evidence, and cannot interfere, except in cases where conclusions drawn by the courts below are on the basis of no evidence at all, or are perverse. A different interpretation on facts is also not possible merely because another view on the same set of facts may just be possible.

(3.) Only a few salient features and facts require to be noted.