My Lord, Difference between Erroneous Judgment and Perverse Judgment?

[There is a material distinction. A decision can be considered to be perverse only when there is some conscious violation of a rule of law or of procedure.]

– Kristamma Naidu v. Chapa Naidu, 1894 ILR 17 Mad 410.

[A good working test of perversity is contained in 2 Judgments. In H.B. Gandhi, Excise and Taxation Officer-cum-Assessing Authority v. Gopi Nath, 1992 Supp (2) SCC 312 it was held: “It is, no doubt, true that if a finding of fact is arrived at by ignoring or excluding relevant material or by taking into consideration irrelevant material or if the finding so outrageously defies logic as to suffer from the vice of irrationality incurring the blame of being perverse, then, the finding is rendered infirm in law.”

In Kuldeep Singh v. Commr. of Police, (1999) 2 SCC 10 it was held: “A broad distinction has, therefore, to be maintained between the decisions which are perverse and those which are not. If a decision is arrived at on no evidence or evidence which is thoroughly unreliable and no reasonable person would act upon it, the order would be perverse. But if there is some evidence on record which is acceptable and which could be relied upon, howsoever compendious it may be, the conclusions would not be treated as perverse.”]

– Hon’ble Justice R.F. Nariman, Associate Builders v. Delhi Development Authority, (2015) 3 SCC 49.

[The safest approach on perversity is the classic approach on the reasonable man’s inference on the facts. To him, if the conclusion on the facts in evidence made by the Court below is possible, there is no perversity. If not, the finding is perverse. Inadequacy of evidence or a different reading of evidence is not perversity.]

– Hon’ble Justice Kurian Joseph, Damodar Lal v. Sohan Devi, [Civil Appeal No. 231 of 2015] decided on 05.01.2016.

My Lord, Difference between Erroneous Judgment and Perverse Judgment?