Back
RAJENDRA M. SAREEN
Umeshbhai Sumanbhai Chamadbhai Chaudhari – Appellant
Versus
Tulsibhai Sudharabhai Chaudhari – Respondent
ORDER :
1. Present Second Appeal has been preferred by the appellants – original plaintiffs against the concurrent findings of the learned courts below arising out of the Regular Civil Suit No.24 of 2012 filed by the appellants – plaintiffs wherein respondent – defendant filed application Ex.30 under Order 7 Rule 11(a)(d) of the Code of Civil Procedure seeking rejection of the plaint, which was allowed and the plaint was rejected by the learned 2nd Additional Senior Civil Judge, Mangrol, against which the appellants – original plaintiffs preferred Regular Civil Appeal and after hearing the parties at length, the said appeal came to be dismissed by the learned 3rd Additional District Judge, Surat vide order dated 31/11/2021. Being aggrieved by the said order, the appellants – original plaintiffs have preferred the present Appeal From Order.
2. Heard Mr.R.E. Variava, learned advocate for the appellants. He has submitted that both the courts below have not appreciated the plaint and the evidence produced on record and failed to appreciate that the question of limitation and cause of action was mixed question of law and facts, however, the same has not been taken into consideration. It
Jurisdiction of the Civil Court and limitation of the suit
The jurisdiction of the Civil Court is limited to substantial questions of law, and adverse possession must be proven with evidence to claim ownership of government land.
Concurrent findings of fact can only be interfered with if they are found to be perverse or based on no evidence. High Court's jurisdiction in Second Appeal is limited to substantial questions of law....
The High Court cannot interfere with concurrent findings of fact unless they are perverse; a substantial question of law must be established for a second appeal under CPC.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for a substantial question of law to be involved in a Second Appeal under Section 100 of the Civil Procedure Code, emphasizing the ....
Sale - Validity - Defendants were not interested or they did not try to bring their case before court and lead evidence in support of their case to with respect to sale deed being sham, bogus or frau....
The importance of presenting timely and substantiated evidence to support claims, and the consequences of negligence and lack of diligence in pursuing legal remedies.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
