JUDGMENT

Arijit Pasayat, J. — Challenge in these appeals is to the judgment rendered by a learned Single Judge of the Kerala High Court allowing the Second Appeals filed by the respondents by a common judgment. By the impugned judgment the judgment and decree of the Trial Court as well as the First Appellate Court were set aside.

2. It is not necessary to set out the factual details in view of the limited submissions made by learned counsel for the parties.

3. Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the High Court was not justified in disposing of the Second Appeals without formulating the substantial question or questions of law, as mandated by Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (in short the Code).

4. Learned counsel for the respondents submitted that though the High Court has not formulated the questions of law as required, yet on analyzing the evidence, it concluded that the views expressed by the courts below were not tenable in law. That is why the Second Appeals were allowed.

5. It is further submitted that though no substantial question of law was formulated before the Second Appeals were adjudicated, yet that is permissible, because proviso to sub-Sec