RAMESH CHANDRA THAPLIYAL Vs. ANUSUYA PRASAD S/O LATE BHAGWATI PRASAD THAPLIYAL; SHANTI PRASAD S/O LATE BHAGWATI PRASAD THAPLIYAL; DINESH PRASAD S/O LATE BHAGWATI PRASAD THAPLIYAL; POORNIMA DEVI W/O ANUSUYA PRASAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Court has heard the pros and cons expatiated by learned Counsels of either side.

(2.) Although, at the time of presentation of this second appeal, no substantial question of law was formulated by the appellant but it transpires that this Court allowed the amendment application on 10.9.2015 whereby such questions were permitted to be added by way of filing the amended memo of appeal. Therefore, the contention of learned Counsel for respondent no.4 that this second appeal is not maintainable, as contemplated under Section 100(3) of the Code of Civil Procedure, looses its relevance. As such, deeming this appeal maintainable, I now proceed to adjudicate upon its admissibility discussing the merits of the case.

(3.) Vide order dated 21.7.2016, this Court, while rendering the opportunity of hearing to either party, at some length, formulated the following two substantial questions of law: -