— An appeal is the continuation of the same proceedings that allows the appellate court to consider all those aspects which were even challenged before the forum of the first instance. [PLR 2025 SC 2 = PLD 2025 SC 11 = 2024 SCP 386]

— The underlying principle of appellate jurisdiction is to ensure checks and balances by means of re-evaluation and re-examination of the judgment and orders passed by the lower fora in order to scrutinize whether any error has been committed on the facts and law and, while reversing the judgment of court below, record the reasons for justifying the appellate decision. [2024 SCLR 6 = 2023 SCP 396 = 2024 SCMR 34]

— A right of appeal is a right of entering into a superior court and invoking its aid and interposition to redress the error of the forum below — It is essentially a continuation of the original proceedings as a vested right of the litigant to avail the remedy of an appeal provided for appraisal and testing the soundness of the decisions and proceedings of the courts below — It is always explicated and elucidated that the right of appeal is not a mere matter of procedure but is a substantive right — While considering matters in appeal, the appellate courts may affirm, modify, reverse or vacate the decision of lower courts — Fundamentally, the remedy of appeal is elected on the grounds of attack that the court below committed a serious error in the verdict on law and facts, including the plea of misreading or non-reading of evidence led by the parties in support of their contention — It is the duty of the Court and Tribunal to adhere to the applicable law in letter and spirit — It is the foremost duty of the appellate court to determine whether the oral and documentary evidence produced by the parties for and against during the trial fortifies and adds force to the weight of decision or not — No doubt the Trial Court possesses the distinctive position to adjudge the trustworthiness of witnesses and cumulative effect of evidence led in the lis and, in turn, the appellate court accords deference to the findings and such findings are not overturned unless found erroneous or defective — It is not the domain or function of appellate court and/or High Court to re-weigh or interpret the evidence, but they can examine whether the impugned judgment or order attains the benchmark of an unflawed judgment; and whether it is in consonance with the law and evidence and free from unjust and unfair errors apparent on the face of record — However, if the concurrent findings recorded by the lower fora are found to be in violation of law or based on flagrant and obvious defect floating on the surface of record, then it cannot be treated as being so sacrosanct or sanctified that it cannot be reversed by the High Court in the Constitutional jurisdiction vested in it by Article 199 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 as a corrective measure in order to satisfy and reassure whether the impugned decision is within the law or not and if it suffers any jurisdictional defect, in such set of circumstances, the High Court without being impressed or influenced by the fact that the matter reached the High Court under Constitutional jurisdiction in pursuit of the concurrent findings recorded below, can cure and rectify the defect. [2024 SCLR 30 = 2024 SCMR 164 = 2023 SCP 350]