ORDER

Leave granted.

2. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 3.10.2007 passed by the High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Hyderabad in Second Appeal No.865 of 1997.

3. Learned senior counsel appearing for the appellant raised a preliminary objection that in the impugned judgment, the High Court has set-aside the concurrent findings of facts of two courts without formulating any substantial question of law which is mandatory according to Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure after 1976 Amendment.

4. There is considerable material which led to 1976 Amendment in the Code of Civil Procedure. Legislative Background in the 54th Report of the Law Commission of India submitted in 1973:

5. The comprehensive 54th Report of the Law Commission of India submitted to the Government of India in 1973 gives historical background regarding ambit and scope of Section 100 C.P.C. According to the said report, any rational system of administration of civil law should recognize that litigation in civil cases should have two hearings on facts - one by the trial court and one by the court of appeal.

6. In the 54th Report of the Law Commission of India, it is incorporated that it may be permis