HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED S.A .No. 1649 of 2011 JUDGMENT: This Second Appeal has been filed aggrieved by the decree and judgment dated 6.09.2011 passed in A.S.No. 122 of 2006 by the IX Additional Chief Judge (FTC), City Civil Court, Hyderabad , dismissing the appeal confirming the judgment and decree dated 20.10.2005 passed in O.S. No. 1009 of 1999 on the file of IV Senior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad. Appellant herein is the defendant in O.S.No. 1009 of 1999. The suit was filed for eviction of the defendant from the plaint schedule property for recovery of arrears, mesne profits. The trial court decreed the suit for Rs. 1,02, 541/- with interest at 6% per annum from the date of decree till the date of realization. The trial Court also directed that the plaintiff is also entitled for future mesne profits at Rs. 2,200/- per month from the date of suit till the date of delivery of possession of the plaint schedule property in E.P.No. 66 of 2001 on payment of proper Court fee. Aggrieved by the same, defendant in the suit filed appeal and the appellate court dismissed the appeal with costs confirming the judgment and decree of the trial Court. Aggrieved by the same, the present Second Appeal is filed. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant-defendant and also perused the entire material made available on record. I have perused the order impugned. The trial court considered the matter elaborately and decreed the suit. On appeal, the appellate court dismissed the appeal with costs confirming the decree and judgment of the trial Court holding that there are no reasons to interfere with the finding of the trial Court It is well settled by a catena of decisions of the Supreme Court that in the second appeal filed under Section 100 of Code of Civil Procedure, this Court cannot interfere with the findings of fact arrived at by both the courts below. Having heard the learned counsel for the appellant and on perusing the grounds in the memorandum of second appeal, this court is of the view that the substantial questions of law framed in the second appeal involve appreciation of facts and evidence on record, which both the courts below have elaborately considered. This Court cannot once again appreciate the facts and evidence on record, that too, in the second appeal. In the above circumstances, there is no question of law much less substantial question of law, warranting interference by this court. The Second Appeal is dismissed at the stage of admission. ______________________ GHULAM MOHAMMED, J DATE: 30.12.2011 KA