- (1.) Leave granted.
(2.) In a second appeal the High Court interfered with the concurrent findings made by the trial court and the first appellate court and decreed the suit filed by the respondents-plaintiffs. We do not wish to go into the merits of the contention, for, the High Court has not properly exercised the jurisdiction under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Without a substantial question of law the High Court cannot exercise jurisdiction in second appeal and that is clearly provided in Section 100 of civil Procedure Code. It-is admitted by both sides that the impugned judgment is bereft of any question of law, much less any substantial question of law. However, learned counsel for the respondents submitted that a substantial question of law had in fact arisen from the concurrent judgments though the same has not been made mention of by the High Court.
(3.) We, therefore, set aside the impugned judgment and remit the case back to the High court for disposing of the appeal afresh after formulating the substantial question of law, if there is any such question of law discernible from the case.;