Joytosh Banerjee, J.

1. This appeal is directed against the order passed in Title Appeal No. 198 of 1968 through which the learned Subordinate Judge, 2nd Court, Midnapore dismissed the appeal and affirmed the judgment and decree of dismissal passed by learned Munsiff 2nd Court, Contai in Title Suit No. 482/65.

2. The Appellant, state of West Bengal filed the present appeal being aggrieved by the concurrent judgments of the courts below. Shortly put, the facts and circumstances leading to the present appeal are as follows:

Respondent No. 1 of the present appeal filed a suit before the trial court praying for a declaration that the suit property was purchased by the Plaintiff and in this way became a tenant under the Defendant No. 1, State of West Bengal and the order of vesting of the suit land was totally illegal, alleging specifically that suit property measuring about 8 decimal of land formerly belonged to Defendant Nos. 2 and 3 (Respondents Nos. 2 and 3) of the present appeal the aforesaid owners of the property sold away the same to the Plaintiff/Respondent No. 1 of the present appeal by a sale deed dated April 9, 1956, and gave up possession in favour of the purchaser. After the purchase, the Plaintiff tendered rent to the Appellant, State of West Bengal who on accepting the same admitted the Plaintiff/Respondent No. 1 to be a tenant of the suit property. In spite of that, the Defendant No. 1 of the suit and the Appellant of the present appeal, the State of West Bengal issued notice under Section 19(2) of the Estate Acquisition Act upon the previous owners of the land Defendants Nos. 2 and 3 in respect of such suit property. When the tehsildar of the area threatened to settle the suit land with others, the Plaintiff/Respondent No. 1 had to bring the suit after issuing notice under Section 80 of Code of Civil Procedure. The State of West Bengal being the Defendant No. 1 contested the suit denying the material allegations. Both the courts below in consideration of the evidence on record came to a firm finding that the Defendant, State of West Bengal, the present Appellant here failed to establish that the vendors of the Plaintiff that is to say Respondents Nos. 2 and 3 of the present appeal were big raiyats, as such there was no question of vesting of the suit land by the Appellant state so the suit land did not vest in the State of West Bengal. There was a further finding that Kobala, the title deed of the Plaintiff/Respondent No. 1 was not collusive and not without consideration. With this findings, the trial court decreed the suit declaring the title of the Plaintiff/Respondent No. of the present appeal to the suit land restraining the Respondent No. 1 that is to say the present Appellant, State of West Bengal permanently from disturbing Plaintiff possession over the-suit land. The said findings were affirmed by the first appellate court which on such findings dismissed the appeal.

3. The question before this Court is whether there is any substantial question of law involved in the present appeal or not.

4. Under Order 42 Rule 2 Code of Civil Procedure, it has been categorically provided that at the time of making an order under Rule 11 of Order 41 for hearing of a Second Appeal, the court shall formulate the substantial question of law as required by Section 100, and in doing so the court may direct that the Second Appeal be heard on the question so formulated and it shall not be open to the Appellant to noise any other ground in the appeal without the leave of the court, given in accordance with a provision of Section 100. Section 100 which deals with, appeal from appellate decrees clearly lays down that a Second Appeal shall lie to the High Court from every decree passed in appeal by any court subordinate to the High Court, if the High Court is satisfied that the case involves a substantial question of law So the total effect of these provisions is that a Second Appeal can be preferred before the High Court from every decree passed in appeal by any subordinate court provided such appeal involves a substantial question of law and at the time of such admission, the court is required to formulate the substantial question of law and the Second Appeal shall be heard on such question so formulated and it would not be open to the Appellant to urge on any other ground without the leave of the court. Unfortunately, in the present appeal there is no indication that the appeal in question involves any substantial question of law. The only question on which the decision of both the courts practically rested was whether the vendors of the Plaintiff/Respondents No. 1 were big raiyats or not. It is an admitted position that under the Estate Acquisition Act, the question of vesting of the land held by a raiyat, only arise when such raiyat is a big raiyat that is to say a raiyat having more land than what is permissible under the Act. In the instant case, there is a concurrent findings of both the courts below that the vendors of the Plaintiff who are Respondents Nos. 2 and 3 of the present appeal were not big raiyats as the Appellants, State of West Bengal failed to show by producing relevant evidence that the vendors were in fact big raiyats. This Court cannot enter into the same question which is essentially a question of fact, once again, in the Second Appeal. The further question which was involved in the suit was an allegation that the sale deed which was executed in favour of the Plaintiff/Respondent No. 1 was a collusive document which was created only for the purpose of avoiding vesting. There is no question of vesting in the acts and circumstances of the case, therefore second question involved became redundant, although the same was answered in favour of the Plaintiff/Respondent No. 1 by both the courts below.

5. In the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case I am constrained to hold that the present appeal does not involve any substantial question of law. Therefore, the appeal stands dismissed. Let the L.C.R. along with a copy of the judgment be sent down to the trial court for information and necessary action, if any.