- (1.) In this appeal the High Court has disposed of the second appeal by observing that no substantial question of law arises out of the judgment of the lower appellate court. The order is a short one which reads as under: "Rejected as no substantial questions of law arise and the learned district Judge decided the case correctly and in accordance with the relevant provisions of law. "
(2.) Having heard learned counsel for the parties at quite some length, we find, from the mere reading of the appellate court's judgment, that three substantial questions of law do arise for consideration of the High Court under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure as under: 1. Whether the gift deed of 1944 in favour of Defendant 1 can be said to be accepted in accordance with law by the done 2. Whether the suit filed by the respondent-plaintiff against the appellant-Defendant 1 can be said to be barred by limitation 3. What is the legal effect of the common gift deed having become final in favour of the co-done Defendant 2, to the extent of the latter's share
(3.) The civil appeal is, therefore, allowed. The impugned order of the high Court is set aside and Second Appeal No. 22 of 1987 is restored to the file of the High Court with a request to redecide the same in accordance with law on the aforesaid three substantial questions of law, after hearing the parties, at its earlier convenience and preferably within a period of four months from the receipt of a copy of this order.;