Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Smt. Sujatha, filed a suit for permanent injunction in O.S. No. 81/2004 before the Civil Judge (Jr. Dn.) and JMFC, Shiggaon, seeking to restrain the respondents from interfering with her possession over the suit property. The trial court dismissed the suit on 27.11.2006, holding that the appellant failed to prove her possession and title. The appellant appealed to the Prl. Civil Judge (Sr. Dn.), Haveri, in R.A. No. 02/2007, which was dismissed on 18.02.2010, affirming the trial court's findings. The appellant then filed the present second appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) before the Karnataka High Court. The High Court, after hearing the counsel for the appellant and respondents, found that the lower appellate court had concurrently affirmed the findings of fact recorded by the trial court. The court noted that no substantial question of law arose for consideration in the second appeal, as the findings were based on appreciation of evidence and were not perverse. Consequently, the High Court dismissed the second appeal, upholding the concurrent findings and the dismissal of the suit for permanent injunction.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure - Second Appeal - Section 100 CPC - Concurrent Findings of Fact - The High Court declined to interfere with the concurrent findings of fact recorded by the trial court and the first appellate court, as no substantial question of law arose for consideration. The suit for permanent injunction was dismissed on the ground that the plaintiff failed to prove possession and title over the suit property. (Paras 1-10) B) Property Law - Permanent Injunction - Possession and Title - The plaintiff sought permanent injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with her possession. The courts below held that the plaintiff did not establish her possession or title over the suit property, and the defendants were in possession. The High Court affirmed the dismissal of the suit. (Paras 1-10)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the second appeal under Section 100 of CPC is maintainable when the lower appellate court has concurrently affirmed the findings of fact recorded by the trial court?
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed both second appeals, upholding the concurrent findings of the courts below and the dismissal of the suit for permanent injunction.
Law Points
- Second appeal under Section 100 CPC
- concurrent findings of fact
- no substantial question of law
- permanent injunction
- possession
- title
