Case Note & Summary
The appellant filed a Second Appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, challenging the judgment and decree dated 18th February 2026 passed by the learned District Judge, Khed, District Ratnagiri in Regular Civil Appeal No.06 of 2025, which dismissed the appellant's appeal and confirmed the judgment and decree dated 25th March 2025 passed by the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Khed in Regular Civil Suit No.6 of 2020. The appellant had sought quashing of both judgments. The dispute pertained to a suit for injunction regarding a piece of land claimed by the appellant. The trial court and the first appellate court concurrently found that the suit property was a public road and not part of the appellant's land. The High Court, after hearing the appellant's counsel and the Assistant Government Pleader for the respondent State authorities, held that no substantial question of law arose for consideration in the second appeal. The court noted that the concurrent findings of fact were based on evidence and were not perverse. Accordingly, the Second Appeal was dismissed at the admission stage itself, along with the pending interim application.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure - Second Appeal - Substantial Question of Law - Section 100 CPC - The High Court declined to interfere with concurrent findings of fact by the trial court and first appellate court, holding that no substantial question of law arose for consideration. The courts below had concurrently held that the suit property was a public road and not part of the appellant's land. (Paras 1-3)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the High Court should interfere with concurrent findings of fact in a second appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.
Final Decision
Second Appeal dismissed at admission stage; no substantial question of law arose. Interim Application disposed of.
Law Points
- Second appeal
- substantial question of law
- concurrent findings of fact
- interference limited to perversity
- Section 100 CPC
Case Details
2026 LawText (BOM) (06) 117
Second Appeal No. 116 of 2026 with Interim Application No. 726 of 2026
Mr. Sumit Kothari a/w. Mr. Pradeep Salgar for Appellants/Applicants; Dr. Ashwini A. Takalkar, AGP for respondent Nos.6, 7 & 8
Sarpanch Grampanchayat Ghanekhunt and Others
Gajanan Vitthal Dhadve (deceased through legal heirs) and Others
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Civil Second Appeal against concurrent judgments in a suit for injunction.
Remedy Sought
Appellant sought quashing of judgments of the trial court and first appellate court which dismissed the suit for injunction.
Filing Reason
Appellant claimed that the suit property was part of his land, but courts below held it was a public road.
Previous Decisions
Trial court dismissed the suit on 25th March 2025; first appellate court dismissed the appeal on 18th February 2026.
Issues
Whether the High Court should interfere with concurrent findings of fact in a second appeal under Section 100 CPC.
Submissions/Arguments
Appellant argued that the judgments of the courts below were erroneous and required interference.
Respondent State authorities supported the concurrent findings.
Ratio Decidendi
In a second appeal under Section 100 CPC, the High Court cannot interfere with concurrent findings of fact unless they are perverse or based on no evidence. No substantial question of law arose in this case.
Judgment Excerpts
The Appellant has filed the present Second Appeal praying for quashing and setting aside the judgment and decree dated 18th February 2026 passed by the learned District Judge, Khed, District Ratnagiri in Regular Civil Appeal No.06 of 2025, whereby the appeal preferred by the present Appellant came to be dismissed and the judgment and decree passed by the learned Trial Court was confirmed.
The Appellant has further prayed for quashing and setting aside the judgment and decree dated 25th March 2025 passed by the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Khed, District Ratnagiri in Regular Civil Suit No.6 of 2020.
Procedural History
The appellant filed Regular Civil Suit No.6 of 2020 for injunction, which was dismissed by the trial court on 25th March 2025. The appellant appealed to the District Court in Regular Civil Appeal No.06 of 2025, which was dismissed on 18th February 2026. The appellant then filed the present Second Appeal No.116 of 2026 in the High Court.
Acts & Sections
- Code of Civil Procedure, 1908: Section 100
