Case Note & Summary
The case involves a Regular Second Appeal filed by the defendants (appellants) against the judgment and decree of the Civil Judge (Sr. Dn.), Ranebennur, dated 06.11.2007 in R.A. No. 62/2003, which reversed the trial court's dismissal of the suit and decreed partition in favor of the plaintiff (respondents). The suit was originally filed by Noorahammed Khan (since deceased, represented by his LRs) seeking partition and separate possession of the suit property, claiming it to be joint family property. The trial court dismissed the suit, but the lower appellate court allowed the appeal, holding that the property was joint family property and that the plaintiff was entitled to a share. The defendants challenged this in the High Court under Section 100 CPC. The High Court, after hearing the parties, found that the lower appellate court had correctly appreciated the evidence and that no substantial question of law arose. The court noted that the concurrent findings of fact were based on evidence and were not perverse. The appeal was dismissed, confirming the decree for partition.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure Code - Regular Second Appeal - Section 100 CPC - Substantial Question of Law - The High Court in a second appeal can only interfere if there is a substantial question of law. Concurrent findings of fact by the courts below cannot be re-appreciated unless perverse or based on no evidence. Held that the appellant failed to demonstrate any perversity or error of law in the impugned judgment (Paras 1-10). B) Property Law - Partition - Joint Family Property - The suit property was claimed to be joint family property. The trial court dismissed the suit, but the lower appellate court reversed and decreed partition. The High Court upheld the appellate court's finding that the property was joint family property and that the plaintiff was entitled to a share. Held that the concurrent finding of fact was based on evidence and not liable to be interfered with (Paras 5-10).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the judgment and decree of the lower appellate court reversing the trial court's dismissal of the suit suffers from any substantial question of law warranting interference under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the Regular Second Appeal, confirming the judgment and decree of the lower appellate court.
Law Points
- Section 100 CPC
- substantial question of law
- concurrent findings of fact
- partition suit
- joint family property
