SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2000 Supreme(SC) 999

N.S.HEGDE, V.N.KHARE
Ramavilasom Grandhasala – Appellant
Versus
N. S. S. Karayogam – Respondent


ORDER

Leave granted.

2. The plaintiff-respondent filed a suit for declaration and possession. The said suit was dismissed. An appeal against the said decree was also dismissed. Thereafter the plaintiff-respondent filed a second appeal before the High Court. The high Court without formulating any substantial question of law, as required under sub-section (4) of Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure allowed the second appeal and decreed the suit. It is against the said judgment the defendant-appellant is in appeal. This Court on more than one occasion has held that under sub-section (4) of Section 100 of Code of Civil Procedure, the High Court is required to frame substantial question of law and only then it acquires jurisdiction to decide a Second Appeal on merits. In this case the High Court without framing any substantial question of law has allowed the appeal and this in itself is a sufficient ground to set aside the judgment under appeal. We, accordingly, set aside the judgment under appeal and send the matter back to the High Court to decide the appeal only after framing substantial question of law which may arise in the case.

3. The appeal is allowed. The High Court may deci


Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top