Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
Several judgments reinforce that the High Court should not disturb concurrent findings unless they are erroneous or unsupported by evidence ["Prabhat Lal Baruah VS Kanak Chandra Baruah (died) by LRs - Gauhati"]; ["Chauthu VS Mangal Chand - Rajasthan"]; ["Chhatar Singh vs Kheer Singh - Madhya Pradesh"]; ["Jenabai Aamad Lohar VS Singhal Mahendra Mansang - Current Civil Cases"].
Analysis and conclusion
In the Indian judicial system, navigating appeals can be complex, especially when it comes to second appeals. A common question arises: Concurrent findings on facts of the trial court and first appellate court should not be disturbed in a second appeal. This principle upholds the finality of factual determinations, promoting judicial efficiency and preventing endless litigation. But when can the High Court intervene? This blog post delves into the legal framework under Section 100 of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC), key judicial precedents, exceptions, and practical insights.
Whether you're a litigant, lawyer, or simply interested in civil procedure, understanding this doctrine is crucial. We'll explore the binding nature of concurrent findings, supported by landmark judgments, while noting that this is general information and not specific legal advice—consult a qualified attorney for your case.
Second appeals to the High Court are not an opportunity for re-litigating facts. As established in Indian jurisprudence, the jurisdiction under Section 100 CPC is limited to substantial questions of lawAnand K. Jain VS K. L. Pandey - 1998 0 Supreme(SC) 1453. The High Court must formulate such questions at admission, and the appeal is confined to them Kondiba Dagadu Kadam VS Savitribai Sopan Gujar - 1999 4 Supreme 108.
Reappreciating evidence or substituting views on facts is generally impermissible. The first appellate court under Section 96 CPC is considered the final court of factsDharmanand @ Dhannalal vs Yashwant - 2026 Supreme(Online)(MP) 1200. This restriction ensures judicial discipline and reduces pendency, as indiscriminate interference contradicts legislative intent Gurdev Kaur VS Kaki - 2006 3 Supreme 631.
Concurrent findings—those agreed upon by both the trial court and the first appellate court—are typically binding on the High Court in second appeals. Courts have repeatedly held that such findings cannot be disturbed unless perverse, based on no evidence, or violative of legal principlesAnand K. Jain VS K. L. Pandey - 1998 0 Supreme(SC) 1453Narayanan Rajendran VS Lekshmy Sarojini - 2009 0 Supreme(SC) 239.
For instance, in a key judgment, the Supreme Court ruled: High Court erred in disturbing concurrent findings of fact. Questions framed by High Court were not substantial questions of lawAnand K. Jain VS K. L. Pandey - 1998 0 Supreme(SC) 1453. Similarly, concurrent findings of fact recorded by the courts below cannot be disturbed in second appeal unless there is a substantial question of lawNarayanan Rajendran VS Lekshmy Sarojini - 2009 0 Supreme(SC) 239.
This principle is echoed across cases. In property disputes, where trial and appellate courts dismissed suits on limitation or evidence, the High Court refused interference due to concurrent findings Vishniben Kevalram Khushlani VS Chaturbhai Abhesinh Baria - 2022 Supreme(Guj) 1043. Another case affirmed: The concurrent findings of facts will not be disturbed by the High CourtVishniben Kevalram Khushlani VS Chaturbhai Abhesinh Baria - 2022 Supreme(Guj) 1043. Even in tenancy and negligence claims, appeals were dismissed at admission for lacking substantial questions of law Narsinhbhai Naranbhai Gohel VS Suvasben Jayeshbhai Patel - 2023 Supreme(Guj) 442Paschim Gujarat Vij Company Limited VS L. H. Of Decd. Odhavjibhai @ Odhabhai Gobarbhai Shiyal - 2023 Supreme(Guj) 443.
While finality is the rule, exceptions exist to prevent miscarriage of justice. Interference may be warranted if findings are:
The High Court can intervene if the appellate court has not properly appreciated the evidence on recordNarsinhbhai Naranbhai Gohel VS Suvasben Jayeshbhai Patel - 2023 Supreme(Guj) 442Paschim Gujarat Vij Company Limited VS L. H. Of Decd. Odhavjibhai @ Odhabhai Gobarbhai Shiyal - 2023 Supreme(Guj) 443Umeshbhai Sumanbhai Chamadbhai Chaudhari VS Tulsibhai Sudharabhai Chaudhari - 2023 Supreme(Guj) 439. For example, in a mutation cancellation suit, concurrent findings on limitation and fraud were upheld as based on record, barring interference On The Death of Md Abdul Hakim, His Legal Heirs, Smti. Sarakhatun Bibi VS On The Death Of Abdur Rashid Choudhury His Legal Heirs Jahanara Choudhury(Wife) - 2023 Supreme(Gau) 1042. In gift deed validity cases, lack of acceptance under Section 122 TPA led to no disturbance of findings Bakul Das VS Jyostna Suklabaidya - 2015 Supreme(Tri) 281.
However, mere differences in inference or minor appreciation errors do not qualify as perversity. High Court can interfere in the concurrent findings of facts in the Second Appeal if the appellate court has not properly appreciated the evidence on recordNarsinhbhai Naranbhai Gohel VS Suvasben Jayeshbhai Patel - 2023 Supreme(Guj) 442, but this threshold is high.
The doctrine of finality stems from practicality. Trial courts observe witnesses; first appeals allow full evidence review. Second appeals on facts would overwhelm High Courts, causing delays Gurdev Kaur VS Kaki - 2006 3 Supreme 631. As one judgment notes: It is a settled position of law that concurrent findings of fact taken by the trial court and the appellate court should not be disturbed in second appeal unless there is serious infirmity... involving substantial question of lawSatyendra Nath VS Kadambini Debnath - 2015 Supreme(Tri) 357.
In diverse disputes—from electric shock compensation (negligence upheld) to tribal land transfers (jurisdiction barred)—courts emphasize restraint WALTER D'SOUZA, S/O. ANTONY D'SOUZA VS SUDHAKARAN, S/O. SANKARAN - 2021 Supreme(Ker) 132Sahebrao Pundlikrao Vidhale VS Harishkumar Hanumandas Malpani - 2015 Supreme(Bom) 1356. Even in specific performance suits, concurrent findings on readiness and discretion were not disturbed unless exceptional Sahebrao Pundlikrao Vidhale VS Harishkumar Hanumandas Malpani - 2015 Supreme(Bom) 1356.
Cases like partition proceedings or survivorship certificates reinforce: The concurrent findings of facts of the trial court and the first appellate court do not warrant interference in a second appealSmt Savitri vs Smt Savita D/O Late Krishna Gopal Dubey - 2024 Supreme(Online)(MP) 53659WALTER D'SOUZA, S/O. ANTONY D'SOUZA VS SUDHAKARAN, S/O. SANKARAN - 2021 Supreme(Ker) 132.
In conclusion, while the principle that concurrent findings on facts of the trial court and first appellate court should not be disturbed in a second appeal is firmly entrenched, exceptions safeguard justice. Supported by precedents like Anand K. Jain VS K. L. Pandey - 1998 0 Supreme(SC) 1453, Narayanan Rajendran VS Lekshmy Sarojini - 2009 0 Supreme(SC) 239, and CHATUR RANA VS BASUDEV RANA - 1988 0 Supreme(Ori) 274, this balances finality with fairness. Always seek professional advice tailored to your situation, as outcomes depend on specific facts.
This post is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.
#SecondAppeal, #CPC100, #ConcurrentFindings
Both the Courts have recorded the concurrent findings. Accordingly, this Court is of the view that concurrent findings of trial Court as well as appellate Court do not warrant any interference and in the result thereof, this Second Appeal is hereby dismissed. ... It may be mentioned that the first appellate court under Sectio....
Accordingly, this Court is of the view that concurrent findings of trial Court as well as Appellate Court do not warrant any interference and in the result thereof, this Second Appeal is hereby dismissed. ... It may be mentioned that the first appellate court under Section 96 CPC is the last court of facts. The High ....
It is true that the learned trial Court has given the finding of issue Nos. 3 & 4 in affirmative, but the learned Trial Court as well as First Appellate Court have not declared the partition proceedings done by revenue Court as void. ... Appellant has filed this appeal challenging the concurrent finding of the trial Court as well as First #HL....
that concurrent findings of the trial court and the first appellate court ... finding of the Courts below, the High Court should not interfere with the findings of the trial court and the first appellate court on concurrently dismissed the suit by recording all the findings of fact against the be #H....
The findings of facts arrived by the Trial Court on the relevant issues, have been confirmed by the First Appellate Court. ... It may be mentioned that the first appellate court under Section 96 CPC is the last court of facts. The High Court in second appeal under Section 100 CPC cannot interfere with the findings#HL....
There is a settled principle of law that against the concurrent findings, while exercising the powers under Section 100 of the Code, the High Court has to take utmost care while appreciating the facts and the evidence which is recorded by the Trial Court as well as the Lower Appellate Court. ... The concurrent findings of facts will not be disturbed by the High ....
High Court can interfere in the concurrent findings of facts in the Second Appeal if the appellate court has not properly appreciated the evidence on record. 9. ... At the outset, it is required to be noted that as such there were concurrent findings of facts recorded by the learned trial court as well as the learned first #H....
High Court can interfere in the concurrent findings of facts in the Second Appeal if the appellate court has not properly appreciated the evidence on record. 9. ... At the outset, it is required to be noted that as such there were concurrent findings of facts recorded by the learned trial court as well as the learned first #H....
Per contra, Shri Roy, the learned Senior Counsel for the respondents has submitted that in the present second appeal, challenge has been made on findings of facts which have also been concurred with by the First Appellate Court and this Court in exercise of powers under Section 100 of the CPC would not ... Choudhury, the learned counsel for the appellants had relied upon the case of MadanLal (supra) to contend that even in a case of....
High Court can interfere in the concurrent findings of facts in the Second Appeal if the appellate court has not properly appreciated the evidence on record. 12. ... At the outset, it is required to be noted that as such there were concurrent findings of facts recorded by the learned trial court as well as the learned first #....
The concurrent findings of facts of the trial court and the first appellate court do not warrant interference in a second appeal. For the reasons discussed above, the R.S.A. is dismissed. The trial court and the first appellate court examined the evidence on record at length and arrived at a reasoned conclusion that the plaintiff is entitled to recover the plaint amount with interests and costs from the defendant and all his assets.
I do not find any substantial question of law so as to entertain the Second Appeal and hence, question of law raised by the appellants herein must be answered against them. Therefore, for all the above reasons, the appeal deserves to be dismissed. Even otherwise, in the Second Appeal preferred u/s.100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the concurrent findings of facts recorded by the trial Court and the first Appellate Court need not be disturbed unless exceptional case is made out on the basis of substantial question of law.
It is a settled position of law that concurrent findings of fact taken by the trial court and the appellate court should not be disturbed in second appeal unless there is serious infirmity in the judgment passed by the courts below involving substantial question of law. In the present case, in my considered opinion, both the trial court as well as the appellate court took decision referring to the evidence on records and there is no infirmity in the judgment passed by the courts below and hence the second appeal is found to be devoid of any merit and accordingly stands dism....
However, for the purpose of deciding the substantial questions formulated before this Court, the substance of the pleadings of both side is narrated hereunder for fair appreciation. 4. The second appeal has been filed against the concurrent findings of the trial Court and the first appellate Court. Pleadings of both side and the evidence have been elaborately discussed by the trial Court as well as the appellate Court.
This second appeal arises out of concurrent findings and judgments of the trial Court and the first appellate Court. The first appellate Court confirmed decree rendered in favour of deceased respondent - plaintiff declaring him as owner of the suit property and for injunction simpliciter.
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
