The High Court of Rajasthan dismissed the second appeal filed by a plaintiff seeking a perpetual injunction. The court held that no substantial question of law arose as the lower courts did not display any perversity in appreciating the evidence, and thus the appeal under Section 100 CPC failed.
Appeal dismissed summarily.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Second Appeal No. 159/2015
Jalam S/o Nanda Bheel, aged about 74 years, R/o Barodiya, Teh. & District. Chittorgarh.
----Appellant
Versus
(Respondent No.2, 3 & 4 R/o Barodiya, Teh. Chittorgarh)
----Respondent
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Naman Mohnot
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.K. LOHRA
Judgment
07/09/2018
Heard learned counsel for the appellant and perused the judgments rendered by learned trial Court as well as learned appellate Court.
At the threshold, learned trial Court dismissed suit of the appellant-plaintiff for perpetual and mandatory injunction upon appreciation of evidence and, thereafter when the said verdict is assailed before the learned first appellate Court, the first appellate Court also concurred with the findings and conclusions of the learned trial Court.
Upon examining the impugned judgments and the grounds set out in memo of appeal, in my opinion, in the instant appeal, no
(2 of 2)
[CSA-159/2015]
question of law, much less substantial question of law is involved. It is not in dispute that for maintaining second appeal availability of substantial question of law is sine-qua-non. A pure and simple concurrent finding of fact cannot be examined by the Court if the same is based on appreciation of evidence. As there is no perversity in the appreciation of evidence by both the Courts below, in my opinion, it would not be appropriate to interfere in exercise of jurisdiction under Section 100 CPC.
Consequently, the appeal fails and the same is hereby dismissed summarily.
Bharti/1
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the High Court should interfere with the concurrent findings of fact of the lower courts in an appeal against a dismissal of a suit for perpetual injunction.
Jalam S/o Nanda Bheel
Gram Panchayat, Barodiya
Bhana S/o Halu Suthar
Jagdish S/o Bhana Suthar
Gopal S/o Bhana Suthar
P.K. Lohra
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
