Telangana High Court
SA/755/2010 of Manchala Abraham Vs Manchala Yebu on 31 December 2010
SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED SECOND APPEAL No. 755 OF 2010 JUDGMENT: This Second Appeal is preferred aggrieved by the decree and judgment dated 12.4.2010 passed in A.S.No. 354 of 2009 by the III Additional District Judge, Guntur confirming the decree and judgment dated 10.07.2009 in O.S.No.
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMEDSECOND APPEAL No. 755OF 2010
JUDGMENT:
This Second Appeal is preferred aggrieved by thedecree and judgment dated 12.4.2010 passed in A.S.No.354 of 2009 by the III Additional District Judge, Gunturconfirming the decree and judgment dated 10.07.2009 inO.S.No. 1107 of 2007 passed by the Principal JuniorCivil Judge, Guntur.
Appellants herein are the plaintiffs in O.S.No. 1107of 2007. He filed the suit for permanent injunction. Thatsuit was dismissed. Aggrieved by the same, appellantsherein filed an appeal and the same was also dismissedby the appellate Court stating that the trial Court takinginto consideration the totality of circumstances refusedto grant relief of permanent injunction. Aggrieved by thesame, the present Second Appeal is filed.
I have perused the order impugned. The trial courtconsidered the matter elaborately and dismissed thesuit. On appeal, the appellate court also confirmed thejudgment and decree passed by the trial court. Therefore, in my opinion the trial court has consideredthe matter objectively and dismissed the suit and thesame was also confirmed by the appellate court.
It is well settled by a catena of decisions of theSupreme Court that in the second appeal filed under Section 100 of Code of Civil Procedure, this Courtcannot interfere with the findings of fact arrived at byboth the courts below. Having heard the learnedcounsel for the appellant and on perusing the grounds inthe memorandum of second appeal, this court is of theview that the substantial questions of law framed in thesecond appeal involve appreciation of facts and evidenceon record, which both the courts below have elaboratelyconsidered. This Court cannot once again appreciatethe facts and evidence on record, that too, in the secondappeal. In the above circumstances, there is noquestion of law much less substantial question of law,warranting interference with the impugned judgment bythis court.
The Second Appeal is dismissed at the stage ofadmission.
_________________________
GHULAM MOHAMMED, J
DATE: 24.12.2010KA
Page 1 of 1
Loading citations and judicial treatment…