{"id":22860,"date":"2026-04-27T08:10:10","date_gmt":"2026-04-27T08:10:10","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/?p=22860"},"modified":"2026-04-27T08:18:25","modified_gmt":"2026-04-27T08:18:25","slug":"second-appeal-under-section-100-cpc-scope-limits-key-judgments-exceptions-explained","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalserviceindia.com\/Legal-Articles\/second-appeal-under-section-100-cpc-scope-limits-key-judgments-exceptions-explained\/","title":{"rendered":"Second Appeal Under Section 100 CPC: Scope, Limits, Key Judgments & Exceptions Explained"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

<\/span>Second Appeal Under Section 100 CPC: Scope and Limitations<\/span><\/h2>\n\n\n\n

<\/span>Introduction<\/span><\/h3>\n\n\n\n

The second appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, is not a third trial. It is a court of law, not a court of equity. The High Court’s jurisdiction is confined to substantial questions of law; it cannot re-appreciate or reweigh findings of fact, however erroneous those findings may appear. This article examines this cardinal limitation through the lens of the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Russi Fisheries P. Ltd v. Bhavna Seth & Ors<\/strong> (2026 INSC 339) and fortifies it with a comprehensive survey of Supreme Court decisions \u2014 beyond those cited in the judgement \u2014 that together form an unbroken chain of authority on the subject. The article also identifies the narrow exceptions where interference is permissible: perversity, inadmissible evidence, and misreading of the record.<\/p>

\n
\n

Table of Contents<\/p>\nToggle<\/span><\/path><\/svg><\/svg><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/a><\/span><\/div>\n