K.N. Goyal, J. - (1.) THIS writ petition is directed against a revisional judgment under Section 25 of the Provincial Small Cause Courts Act whereby the revisional court reversed the finding of fact recorded by the trial court on the question of relationship of landlord and tenant between the parties. The trial court had held that the said relationship was established but the revisional court took a different view of the matter and held that the relationship was not established and accordingly dismissed the suit for eviction which had been decreed by the trial court.
(2.) I have heard learned Counsel for the parties. It is not necessary for me to express any opinion on the merits of the respective cases of the parties. Suffice it to say that the revisional court has exceeded its jurisdiction while interfering with a finding of fact. Under Section 25, the revisional court can interfere only on a question of law, of course, if a finding of fact is based on no evidence or is one which no reasonable person could possibly have arrived at then it could be said to be vitiated by an error of law. Instead the revisional court has re -assessed the evidence and held that the assessment of the evidence by the trial court was not correct. Of course the revisional court has also called the finding of the trial court to be perverse. But merely describing a finding of the trial court as perverse is not sufficient. It is not open to a superior court to characterise any or every finding with which it disagrees on re -appraisal of evidence to be perverse. 'Perverse' is a strong word and is only to be used in respect of a finding which, as mentioned above, is based on no evidence or is such as no reasonable person could possibly reach. The discussion in the judgment of the revisional court shows that such was not the case before it.
(3.) THAT apart, even when the revisional court holds a finding of fact of the Small Cause Court to be bad in law then also the revisional court can only set aside the finding and send the case back to the trial court. It cannot itself reach a contrary finding and decide the case on the basis of that contrary finding.;