The High Court found that the appeal was devoid of merit as it did not raise any legitimate question of law, which is the only permissible ground for appeal from the Small Claims Court. The trial court’s decision to lift the corporate veil was justified because the appellant company failed to produce books of account or evidence of assets, indicating it was a sham and a front for its directors to evade lawful debts. The directors, having special knowledge of the company’s affairs, failed to discharge their burden of proof, warranting an adverse inference. The preliminary objection raised was baseless as it involved disputed facts, contrary to established legal principles. The appeal was dismissed as the appellant was not aggrieved by the order, which was directed at the directors, and the company’s conduct justified the lifting of the corporate veil.