Case Note & Summary
The case involves a second appeal filed by the original defendants (appellants) against a decree of injunction granted in favour of the original plaintiff (respondent) concerning agricultural land. The plaintiff claimed possession of the suit land and alleged that the defendants were trying to disturb his possession. The defendants contested, asserting that part of the land was in possession of the father of appellant No.1. The trial court decreed the suit, and the first appellate court confirmed the decree. The second appeal was admitted on the substantial question of law whether the respondent was entitled to the injunction. The High Court, after hearing counsel, found that the concurrent findings of fact on possession were based on evidence and did not raise any substantial question of law. The appeal was dismissed with no order as to costs.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure - Second Appeal - Substantial Question of Law - Section 100 Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 - The court examined whether the concurrent findings of fact regarding possession of agricultural land could be interfered with in second appeal. The court held that the findings of fact recorded by both lower courts were based on evidence and did not give rise to any substantial question of law. The appeal was dismissed. (Paras 1-5)
Issue of Consideration
Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Respondent was entitled to the injunction decreed in his favour?
Final Decision
The second appeal is dismissed. The decree of the lower appellate court is confirmed. No order as to costs.
Law Points
- Second appeal
- substantial question of law
- concurrent findings of fact
- injunction
- possession
- Section 100 CPC
Case Details
2005 LawText (BOM) (04) 174
Second Appeal No. 603 of 1988
Shri A.S. Khandeparkar for the Appellants, Ms. Seema Sarnaik for the Respondent No.1
Hari Rama Batawale (since deceased by his heirs) and others
Mahadeo Deoji Gambhir (since deceased by his heirs) and another
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Second appeal against a decree of injunction in a suit simplicitor for injunction relating to agricultural land.
Remedy Sought
The appellants sought to set aside the decree of injunction granted in favour of the respondent.
Filing Reason
The appellants challenged the concurrent findings of fact regarding possession of the suit land.
Previous Decisions
The trial court decreed the suit in favour of the plaintiff, and the first appellate court confirmed the decree.
Issues
Whether the respondent was entitled to the injunction decreed in his favour in the facts and circumstances of the case?
Submissions/Arguments
The appellants argued that the suit land was in possession of the father of appellant No.1 after abolition of tenancy. The respondent contended that he was in possession and the appellants were trying to disturb it.
Ratio Decidendi
In a second appeal under Section 100 CPC, the court cannot interfere with concurrent findings of fact unless they give rise to a substantial question of law. The findings of fact recorded by both lower courts regarding possession were based on evidence and did not raise any substantial question of law.
Judgment Excerpts
On 17th February 1989, this Second Appeal was admitted by this Court by passing the following order: 'Parties by Counsel. They are heard. Admitted - the substantial question of law being whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, Respondent was entitled to the injunction decreed in his favour ?'
The Appellants are the original Defendants Nos.1 to 4 in a suit simplicitor for injunction filed by the Respondent No.1-Plaintiff.
Procedural History
The original plaintiff filed a suit for injunction in the trial court, which was decreed. The defendants appealed to the first appellate court, which confirmed the decree. The defendants then filed a second appeal in the High Court, which was admitted on 17th February 1989 on a substantial question of law. The High Court heard the appeal and dismissed it on 6th and 7th April 2005.
Acts & Sections
- Code of Civil Procedure, 1908: Section 100
