Hon'ble Sibghat Ullah Khan, J. - (1.) HEARD learned counsel for the appellant at length. I do not find any error in the order dated 27.4.2011 through which Second Appeal was dismissed in limine under Order 41 Rule 11 C.P.C.
(2.) LEARNED counsel for the appellant has cited an authority of the Supreme Court reported in The J.&K Bank Ltd. vs. Smt. Neelam Rani, 2008 (8) Supreme 392. In the said authority the High Court had dismissed the appeal by just two sentences which were as follows: I have gone through the judgments of the courts below. There are concurrent findings and the points now been raised had been dealt with by the courts below. The Supreme Court held that questions of law were involved hence High Court ought to have considered the questions raised before it, as indicated in the earlier part of the said Supreme Court judgment and thereafter by formulating or framing the aforesaid questions as substantial questions of law the appeal should have been decided by a speaking and reasoned order.
(3.) IN the above authority the Supreme Court was of the opinion that questions of law were involved. Moreover, the High court in that case had rejected the Second Appeal without passing speaking order.;