Limitation in second appeal: High Court should decide the framed legal issue on merits, not remand for a fresh trial.

In second appeal, the High Court is confined to the substantial question of law framed under Section 100 CPC and should decide it on merits rather than remand the matter for a fresh trial merely because a separate limitation issue was not framed. Where the pleadings and evidence already disclose long delay, knowledge of earlier proceedings, and no plausible explanation for the delay, limitation can arise as a question of law and the suit must be rejected under Section 3 of the Limitation Act, 1963. On that basis, a remand serves no useful purpose when the courts below have already found the suit hopelessly time-barred. The remand was therefore unjustified and the limitation finding was upheld.

---

---

Issues: Whether the High Court was justified in remanding the matter for a fresh trial on limitation instead of deciding the second appeal on the substantial question of law already framed, and whether the suit was barred by limitation despite the absence of a separate issue on limitation at the trial stage.

Analysis: Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 confines a second appeal to substantial questions of law, and once such a question is framed the High Court is expected to decide it on merits. The question of limitation, though often factual-cum-legal, can become a question of law where the pleadings and evidence already show long delay and no plausible explanation for it. A separate issue on limitation is not indispensable when the broader issue and the evidence already cover the controversy, and the court remains bound by Section 3 of the Limitation Act, 1963 to reject a suit instituted beyond time. The courts below had examined the evidence, found knowledge of the earlier proceedings, and held the suit to be hopelessly time-barred. In those circumstances, remand merely because a separate limitation issue had not been framed was unwarranted and would only prolong litigation without serving any useful purpose.

Conclusion: The remand ordered by the High Court was unjustified, and the finding that the suit was barred by limitation was upheld.

Ratio Decidendi: In second appeal, the High Court must decide the substantial question of law on merits and should not remand a matter for a fresh trial merely because a separate limitation issue was not framed, where the pleadings and evidence already disclose that the suit is barred by limitation.

---