Case Note & Summary
The case is a second appeal arising from a property dispute. The appellants, Chatur Khandu Patil and others, were the defendants in a suit filed by the respondent, Somaji Chhagan Patil, seeking a declaration of title and possession over certain agricultural land. The trial court decreed the suit in favor of the respondent, and the first appellate court confirmed that decree. Aggrieved, the appellants filed the present second appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. The core legal issue was whether the second appeal involved any substantial question of law. The appellants argued that the findings of the courts below were perverse and based on misreading of evidence. The respondent contended that the concurrent findings of fact were binding and no interference was warranted. The High Court, after hearing the parties, held that the findings of fact recorded by both courts were based on evidence and there was no perversity. The court reiterated the limited scope of second appeal under Section 100 CPC, which is confined to substantial questions of law. Since no such question arose, the appeal was dismissed. The judgment emphasizes that concurrent findings of fact cannot be reopened in a second appeal unless shown to be perverse or based on no evidence.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure - Second Appeal - Substantial Question of Law - Section 100 Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 - The court examined whether concurrent findings of fact by the trial court and first appellate court could be interfered with in a second appeal. Held that no substantial question of law arises when findings are based on proper appreciation of evidence and no perversity is demonstrated. The appeal was dismissed. (Paras 1-5)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the second appeal involves any substantial question of law warranting interference under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, when the lower appellate court has affirmed the findings of fact recorded by the trial court.
Final Decision
The second appeal is dismissed. The concurrent findings of fact recorded by the trial court and first appellate court are upheld. No order as to costs.
Law Points
- Second appeal
- substantial question of law
- concurrent findings of fact
- perversity
- Section 100 CPC
