NURSES ASSOCIATION Vs. SWETAMBAR MURTHI PUJAK JAIN SANGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The first defendant in the original suit O.S.No.7510 of 1997 on the file of the V Assistant Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai is the appellant in the second appeal. The above said suit was filed by the first respondent herein against the appellant and the second respondent herein for a permanent injunction restraining the appellant herein / first defendant from in any manner interfering with the first respondent's right of passage through the driveway having a width of 40 feet. The second respondent, who figured as second defendant, is only an official and he does not have any personal interest in the outcome of the case. The appellant herein/first defendant alone contested the suit.

(2.) The learned trial Judge decreed the suit as prayed for. As against the decree passed by the trial Judge, the appellant herein preferred an appeal in A.S.No.230 of 2006 and the said appeal came to be disposed of by the VII Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai by judgment and decree dated 22.09.2006, whereby the learned appellate Judge chose to dismiss the appeal with costs confirming the decree passed by the trial Court. Aggrieved by and challenging the said decree of the lower appellate Court, the appellant herein/first defendant has chosen to prefer the present second appeal on various grounds set out in the grounds of second appeal.

(3.) Though a number of grounds have been raised in the grounds of second appeal, the scope of second appeal is limited by Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure. According to Section 100 CPC, an appeal from the appellate decree of a Court subordinate to the High Court will lie to the High Court only on a substantial question/substantial questions of law. At the time of admission, two questions were formulated as substantial questions of law. They are: