Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)

Section: 100,101,115(c)

(a) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), Ss. 100 & 101-Second appeal-Does not lie merety on ground of error on question of fact - Maxim : Interest reipublicae ut sit finis litium (it concerns the State that there be an end to litigation).   A second appeal under section 100 of the Civil Procedure Code would not lie merely on the ground of an error on a question of fact in that clause (c) of that section gives right of second appeal on the ground of an error in law or procedure. The scope of first appeal differs from that of the second appeal in that the former is not limited to any particular grounds of appeal, while in the case of the latter second appeal would lie only in the three contingencies mentioned therein. Section 100 read with section 101, C. P. C. is based on the ground of public policy expressed in the maxim interest reipublicae ut sit finis litium. It concerns the State that there be an end to litigation. The policy of the law is that the first appellate Court has the last say on the question of fact and erroneous finding however gross or inexcusable on the question of fact provided all the material evidence has been considered is not subject to second appeal.   (b) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), S. 115 (c)-Revision- Court must be proved to have acted "illegally" or with "material irregularity"-Appraisement of evidence -Decision arrived at in proper exercise of jurisdiction even though erroneous in law or in fact-No ground for revision.   Date of hearing: 25th March 1966.   JUDGMENT   The short question raised in this revision petition is as to whether the appraisement of evidence by the first Appellate Court substituting its own assessment of the evidence for that of the trial Court is a revisable order under section 115 of the Civil Procedure Code. https://www.pakistanlawsite.com/Login/PrintCaseLaw?caseName=1966P32          1/3 P L D 1966 (W   The admitted facts giving raise to this revision petition are that on 26-9-63 an exparte decree was passed in favour of the petitioners against the respondent for recovery of Rs. 200 as damages. On 11-1-1964,…