Case Note & Summary
The case pertains to a second appeal filed by the original defendants (appellants) against the judgment and decree passed by the first appellate court, which confirmed the trial court's decree in favor of the original plaintiffs (respondents). The dispute involved a property suit where the plaintiffs sought relief regarding certain agricultural land. The trial court decreed the suit in favor of the plaintiffs, and the first appellate court upheld that decree. The appellants then filed the present second appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. The High Court heard the learned counsel for both sides. The court noted that the second appeal was admitted on the following substantial questions of law: (i) Whether the courts below erred in holding that the plaintiffs proved their title and possession over the suit property? (ii) Whether the findings of the courts below are perverse and based on no evidence? After hearing arguments, the High Court observed that the courts below had concurrently found that the plaintiffs had established their title and possession. The court examined the evidence on record and found that the findings were not perverse and were based on proper appreciation of evidence. The High Court held that no substantial question of law arose for its interference. Consequently, the second appeal was dismissed, and the decree of the courts below was confirmed. The court also noted that the appellants had not pointed out any legal infirmity or perversity in the concurrent findings. The judgment was delivered on 12 October 2023 by Justice S. G. Mehare.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure - Second Appeal - Substantial Question of Law - Section 100, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 - The court examined whether the second appeal raised any substantial question of law. Held that the concurrent findings of fact by the trial court and first appellate court were based on evidence and not perverse, hence no interference was warranted (Paras 1-2).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the second appeal involves any substantial question of law warranting interference with the concurrent findings of fact recorded by the courts below.
Final Decision
Second appeal dismissed. The concurrent findings of the trial court and first appellate court are confirmed. No order as to costs.
Law Points
- Second appeal
- substantial question of law
- concurrent findings of fact
- interference limited to perversity
- Section 100 CPC
