Sudhir Agarwal, J.—

1. Heard Sri V.S.Singh, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri R.N.Singh, learned counsel for the respondents.

2. This second appeal was presented through memo of appeal dated Nil without specifying any substantial question of law, which according to appellant is/are involved in this appeal, which is requirement under Section 100(3) of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as the "Code"), as amended by Act 104 of 1976, Section 37, w.e.f. 1st February, 1977. Besides, the appeal was admitted on 1st March, 1978 but without formulating any substantial question of law, which is the requirement under Section 100(4) of Act, 1908.

3. Whether such a memo of appeal having not been presented in accordance with mandatory requirement of Section 100(3) of Act, 1908 and there is no amendment sought in memo of appeal, can be said to be maintainable in view of requirement of Section 100 of Act, 1908.

4. Under Section 100 of Code, a second appeal can be entertained by this Court only if it involves substantial question of law. In other words it does not confer any jurisdiction on this Court to interfere with pure questions of fact, which have been considered and a

Click Here to Read the rest of this document