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

2000 Supreme(SC) 61

D.P.MOHAPATRA, S.B.MAJMUDAR
Manorama Thamburatty – Appellant
Versus
C. K. Sujatha Thampuratti – Respondent


ORDER

Leave granted.

2. We have heard learned counsel for the parties finally with their consent.

3. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the High Court while deciding the second appeal has not kept in view the limited jurisdiction conferred on it under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, nor has it framed substantial questions of law for its decision. Learned counsel for the respondents could not effectively combat this contention. A mere look at the impugned order shows that the High Court has allowed the second appeal and remanded the proceedings without strictly following the procedure laid down under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Only on this short ground and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the controversy between the parties, this appeal is allowed. The impugned judgment and order of the High Court are set aside. Second Appeal No. 7 of 1998-A is restored to the file of the High Court with a request to redecide the same in accordance with the limited jurisdiction conferred under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure after following the procedure laid down therein. No costs.

(C.R.) Appeal allowed.

*************

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