1 59-WP-10233-14.odt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 10233 OF 2014 THE COMMISSIONER, AHMEDNAGAR MUNICIPAL CORPORATION VERSUS ARUN MUKUNDAS DUGAD AND OTHERS ... Advocate for Petitioner : Mr. Kishor N. Lokhande ... CORAM : SACHIN S. DESHMUKH, J. DATE : 02-09-2026 PER COURT:- 1. The petitioner-Corporation has approached this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, feeling aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 26.07.2013 rendered by the District Judge-5, Ahmednagar, in Regular Civil Appeal No. 17 of 2010. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the appellate court erred in concluding that the amount settled in the Lok-Adalat pertained to the disputed property tax bill. He argued that the appellate court ignored a crucial fact: the Lok-Adalat settlement was exclusively for a distinct period from 1995 to 2005, whereas the dispute involves a independent assessment. Consequently, the petitioner contends that the appellate court misdirected itself and committed a patent error in allowing the respondent’s appeal. 2026:BHC-AUG:41588 2 59-WP-10233-14.odt 3. On the contrary, perusal of the record indicates that the courts below have scrutinized the facts. The petitioner-Corporation has assessed the property applying the rateable value method as per the prevailing rules and regulations. The trial court and the appellate court have evaluated the evidence regarding the Lok- Adalat settlement and concurrently arrived at their findings of fact. 4. It is a well-settled legal position that the supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is limited. This Court does not sit as a court of appeal to re-appreciate evidence unless the findings of the subordinate courts suffer from a patent illegality, procedural impropriety, or a demonstrable perversity. 5. In the present case, the learned counsel for the petitioner has failed to demonstrate perversity, material irregularity, or jurisdictional error in the well-reasoned judgment of the appellate court. The concurrent findings of fact rendered by the courts below do not warrant any interference by this Court under its extraordinary jurisdiction. 6. In the absence of any demonstrable error, the writ petition is devoid of merits and stands dismissed. [SACHIN S. DESHMUKH, J.] rrd