https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=296419 A second appeal under Section 100 CPC lies only on a properly formulated substantial question of law, and the High Court cannot reopen concurrent findings of fact by reappreciating evidence. The Supreme Court reiterated that jurisdiction in second appeal depends on that statutory threshold, and interference is not justified unless the findings are perverse, ignore material evidence, or rest on an erroneous legal principle. The Court also noted that recovery of possession must satisfy title, possession and limitation requirements; where the defendant is in possession and the suit is not shown to be within time, possession cannot be granted merely because title is declared. en-us Thu, 27 Aug 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 18 Mar 2026 15:51:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=296419 A second appeal under Section 100 CPC lies only on a properly formulated substantial question of law, and the High Court cannot reopen concurrent findings of fact by reappreciating evidence. The Supreme Court reiterated that jurisdiction in second appeal depends on that statutory threshold, and interference is not justified unless the findings are perverse, ignore material evidence, or rest on an erroneous legal principle. The Court also noted that recovery of possession must satisfy title, possession and limitation requirements; where the defendant is in possession and the suit is not shown to be within time, possession cannot be granted merely because title is declared. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 27 Aug 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=296419