In Brief
The State of Rajasthan challenged the High Court's dismissal of its second appeals in a mining dispute, where the trial court and first appellate court had both decreed in favour of the mining lessee (Shiv Dayal) and granted him an injunction against state interference. The High Court dismissed the second appeal on the ground that no substantial question of law arose since both lower courts had reached the same conclusion. The Supreme Court held that concurrent findings of fact are not absolute in second appeals; they can be challenged if recorded outside the pleadings, unsupported by evidence, based on statutory misinterpretation, or unreasonable. The Court identified five substantial questions of law requiring adjudication: the land's forest or revenue status, statutory compliance under forest and mining laws, the mining lease's legality, the suit's consistency with applicable laws, and the sufficiency of evidence for the plaintiff's injunction claim. The Court remanded the case to the High Court to properly frame and decide these substantial questions of law on merits.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.