https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=186245 The amended Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 confines second appeals to cases involving a substantial question of law and requires that question to be formulated. Section 41 of the Punjab Courts Act, 1918 was held repugnant to that amended scheme and could not continue to govern second appeals to the extent it dispensed with that requirement. The Court also clarified that findings of fact are ordinarily not reopened in second appeal, though perversity or other legal error may give rise to a substantial question of law. High Court interference must therefore comply with Section 100, and not rest on Section 41 alone. en-us Wed, 21 Mar 2001 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 08 May 2025 18:33:46 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=186245 The amended Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 confines second appeals to cases involving a substantial question of law and requires that question to be formulated. Section 41 of the Punjab Courts Act, 1918 was held repugnant to that amended scheme and could not continue to govern second appeals to the extent it dispensed with that requirement. The Court also clarified that findings of fact are ordinarily not reopened in second appeal, though perversity or other legal error may give rise to a substantial question of law. High Court interference must therefore comply with Section 100, and not rest on Section 41 alone. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 21 Mar 2001 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=186245