S.P.KURDUKAR, J.

(1) LEAVE granted. Heard learned counsel for the parties. This appeal is at the behest of the plaintiff. On 29-4-1995, an ex parte decree was passed. The said decree came to be confirmed by the lower appellate court. The High Court however interfered with the judgment and decree passed by the courts below and allowed the second appeal filed by the defendant and remitted the matter back to the trial court for disposal in accordance with law.

(2) ON a perusal of the judgment of the High Court, we find that the High Court has not complied with the requirement of Section 100, in particular, sub-section (4) of the Civil Procedure Code. Without formulating a substantial question of law, the High Court has proceeded to consider the evidence and other material on record and accordingly allowed the second appeal. In our opinion, the course adopted by the High Court while allowing the second appeal is totally unsustainable in view of Section 100 of the Civil Procedure Code. The impugned judgment and order of the High Court is accordingly set aside and the matter is remanded back to the High Court. We hope that the High Court will now follow the mandatory provision contained in Section 100 of the Civil Procedure Code and will formulate substantial question/s of law if it arises in the said second appeal. The High Court will then dispose of the said question/s of law in accordance with law.

(3) THE appeal is partly allowed. In the circumstances, there will be no order as to costs.