2023 SCMR 1402
If the concurrent findings recorded by the lower fora are found to be in violation of law , or based on misreading or non - reading of evidence , then they cannot be treated as being so sacrosanct or sanctified that they cannot be reversed by the High Court in revisional jurisdiction which is pre - eminently corrective and supervisory in nature . In fact , the Court in its revisional jurisdiction under section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure , 1908 ( " C.P.C. " ) , can even exercise its suo motu jurisdiction to correct any jurisdictive errors committed by a subordinate Court to ensure strict adherence to the safe administration of justice . The jurisdiction vested in the High Court under section 115 , C.P.C. is to satisfy and reassure that the order is within its jurisdiction ; the case is not one in which the Court ought to exercise jurisdiction and , in abstaining from exercising jurisdiction , the Court has not acted illegally or in breach of some provision of law , or with material irregularity , or by committing some error of procedure in the course of the trial which affected the ultimate decision . The scope of revisional jurisdiction is restricted to the extent of misreading or non - reading of evidence , jurisdictional error or an illegality in the judgment of the nature which may have a material effect on the result of the case , or if the conclusion drawn therein is perverse or in conflict with the law .
0 comments:
Post a Comment