ORDER :

1. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied by the impugned judgment and order dated 28.09.2021 passed by the learned 3rd Additional District Judge, Petlad in Regular Civil Appeal No.25 of 2019 whereby the learned Additional District Judge has confirmed the impugned judgment and decree dated 03.04.2019 passed by the learned Additional Civil Judge, Petlad in Regular Civil Suit No.19 of 2005, the appellant has preferred the present second appeal.

2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the respective parties.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant has submitted that the First Appellate Court has not properly determined the substantial questions of law. He has submitted that the appeal deserves to be allowed and the impugned judgment and order deserves to be quashed and set aside.

4. Considering the facts of the case and materials place on record, it appears that the First Appellate Court has not framed any substantial questions of law. I have also perused the impugned judgment and order passed by the Courts below. In my opinion, under Order 41 Rule 31 of the Civil Procedure Code (hereinafter be referred to as “the Code”), the First Appellate Court is bound to frame points for cons