IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA SA No.324 of 2005 MAHESHWARI DEVI, Wife of late Mathura Jha and daughter of late Sansadhar Jha. Resident of Village Raghopur Balat, P.S. Raj Nagar, District Madhubani. At present residing at Telachhi, P.S. Naugachhia, District Bhagalpur. .........Defendant/Appellant/Appellant Versus NIRBHAY KANT JHA, Son of late Dharnidhar Jha, Resident of Village Raghopur Balat, P.S. Raj Nagar, District- Madhubani. .........Plaintiff-respondent-respondent ----------- 13/ 04.05.2011 Heard learned counsel for the appellant. 2. The present Second Appeal has been filed against the judgment of affirmation. The case of the defendant-appellant herein has been rejected by the learned trial court as also by learned lower appellate court. 3. The plaintiff-sole respondent herein brought a suit for specific performance of contract with respect to a plot of land having an area of about 8 katha, 1 dhur. Before the learned trial court, the plaintiff as also defendant produced their oral and documentary evidence in support of their respective cases. However, after considering the entire materials, learned trial court decreed the suit of the plaintiff-respondent herein and directed the present 2 appellant to execute a sale deed on the basis of terms and conditions of mahadnama (agreement to sell). Defendant being aggrieved by the aforesaid judgment and decree dated 24.04.1998 passed by learned 1st Additional Munsif, Madhubani in Title Suit No.74 of 1989 preferred Title Appeal No. 26 of 1998, which was finally heard by learned Additional District Judge, F.T.C.-IIIrd, Madhubani, who after considering the case of both the parties in full details, has dismissed the aforesaid appeal by his impugned judgment and decree dated 14th September 2005, against which the present Second Appeal has been filed. 4. Learned counsel for the appellant has argued the matter at length and the points, which he has urged are basically question of fact and not a question of law. 5. In absence of involvement of any substantial question of law, the Second Appeal cannot be admitted under the mandate of Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure. 6. For the reasons recorded above, 3 particularly in view of concurrent finding of facts recorded by learned courts below and in view of the facts that only small area of land of about 8 katha is the subject matter of dispute between the parties, this Court does not find any good ground for admitting the present Second Appeal. In the result, this appeal fails and accordingly, it is dismissed, but without costs. Anjani/ ( Birendra Prasad Verma, J.)