Kishori Lal (through his legal representatives after his death) filed a Regular Second Appeal before the Himachal Pradesh High Court challenging concurrent findings of the Trial Court and the District Judge, Kangra, which had dismissed his suit seeking a declaration that a gift deed dated 18.09.1969 executed by his father Asha Puran in favour of defendant no. 1 (his wife Hemlata) was illegal on the ground that the suit land was ancestral property. Both lower courts had held that the plaintiff failed to prove the ancestral nature of the land, that the gift deed was valid, that defendant no. 1 was in possession of the suit land, and that the suit was barred by limitation. In the second appeal, the appellant's counsel argued that the matter had become infructuous as defendant no. 1 had since died after executing a Will in favour of one of the plaintiff's legal heirs, Aradhana Sharma/Ratna Sharma. The respondent's counsel contended that the High Court's jurisdiction in a second appeal is confined strictly to the substantial questions of law framed at admission. The High Court, after examining the scope of a Regular Second Appeal under Section 100 CPC and citing Supreme Court precedents, proceeded to consider the appeal only within the framework of the two substantial questions of law framed at admission.