Case Note & Summary
The present second appeal was filed by the original defendant (since deceased, represented by legal heirs) challenging the concurrent judgments and decrees passed by the trial court and the first appellate court decreeing the suit for specific performance of an agreement to sell a plot of land in favour of the plaintiff-society. The trial court had declared the society as the owner of the plot and directed the defendant to execute a conveyance deed. The first appellate court confirmed the decree. The defendant died during the pendency of the second appeal, and his legal heirs were brought on record. The High Court, in the second appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, examined whether any substantial question of law arose. The court noted that the findings of fact recorded by the courts below were concurrent and based on evidence. The appellant argued that the findings were perverse, but the court found no perversity or lack of evidence. The court held that the second appeal does not lie on questions of fact and that the concurrent findings cannot be interfered with unless they are shown to be perverse or based on no evidence. Since the appellant failed to demonstrate any such ground, the second appeal was dismissed. The court also noted that the appellant's counsel was not present at the time of hearing, and the matter was decided on merits after hearing the respondent's counsel.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure - Second Appeal - Section 100 CPC - Concurrent Findings of Fact - Interference - The High Court in second appeal cannot interfere with concurrent findings of fact unless they are shown to be perverse or based on no evidence. The appellant failed to demonstrate any perversity or substantial question of law. (Paras 1-10) B) Specific Performance - Agreement to Sell - Possession - Concurrent findings of fact regarding execution of agreement and delivery of possession were upheld by the first appellate court. The High Court found no reason to disturb those findings. (Paras 5-10)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the concurrent findings of fact recorded by the courts below in a suit for specific performance of an agreement to sell are perverse or based on no evidence, warranting interference under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.
Final Decision
The second appeal is dismissed. The concurrent judgments and decrees passed by the trial court and the first appellate court are confirmed. No order as to costs.
Law Points
- Concurrent findings of fact
- Section 100 CPC
- Interference limited to substantial question of law
- Perversity
- No evidence
