Case Note & Summary
The dispute arose between neighbouring landholders regarding a water channel that existed on the northern side of the plaintiff's suit schedule property and passed through it to the defendants' properties. The plaintiff filed O.S.No.21/2010 seeking a declaration of his right to draw water from the channel and for an injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with that right. The trial court dismissed the suit, but the First Appellate Court in R.A.No.8/2013 reversed the judgment and decreed the suit. The defendants then filed this Regular Second Appeal under Section 100 of CPC. The High Court, after hearing the appellants' counsel, found that the First Appellate Court had re-appreciated the evidence and recorded findings of fact that were not perverse. The court noted that the appellants had not raised any substantial question of law, as required for a second appeal. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed at the admission stage, confirming the decree of the First Appellate Court.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure - Second Appeal - Substantial Question of Law - Section 100 CPC - The High Court held that the second appeal does not involve any substantial question of law as the First Appellate Court had re-appreciated the evidence and recorded findings of fact which were not shown to be perverse or contrary to law. The appeal was dismissed at the admission stage. (Paras 1-5) B) Easement - Water Channel - Right to Draw Water - The dispute pertained to a water channel passing through the plaintiff's property to the defendants' properties. The trial court dismissed the suit, but the First Appellate Court reversed and decreed the suit, holding that the plaintiff had a right to draw water from the channel. The High Court upheld the appellate decree, finding no error in the appreciation of evidence. (Paras 2-4)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the judgment and decree passed by the First Appellate Court reversing the trial court's decree calls for interference in this second appeal under Section 100 of CPC?
Final Decision
The Regular Second Appeal is dismissed at the admission stage. No order as to costs.
Law Points
- Second appeal under Section 100 CPC
- substantial question of law
- concurrent findings of fact
- interference limited to perversity
- right to water channel
- easementary right
