Hamida & Others vs Md. Kahlil

The Supreme Court held that the High Court erred in reversing the first appellate court's decree for eviction under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, which requires substantial questions of law for interference. The Court emphasized that the first appellate court's findings were based on proper appreciation of evidence regarding the plaintiff's bona fide need for the premises, which included the necessity to accommodate his family and establish a shop for his unemployed sons. The appeal was allowed, reinstating the eviction order against the defendant.