1. Appeals concerning mining leases — substantial question of law. (Para 1 )
Back
Next 
1980 Supreme(SC) 303
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
A.D.Koshal : M.Fazal Ali Syed
Vinod Kumar Shantilal Gosalia
Versus
Gangadhar
Case No. : 1440-1443(n) of 1970
Date of Decision : 7/24/80
Important Points
The court held that appeals involving a substantial question of law of great importance, likely to govern numerous similar cases regarding mining leases, should be referred to a larger bench for adjudication.
Subject
Civil Law - Mining Law
Headnote
(A) Mining Leases - Substantial question of law - Appeals involving a substantial question of law of great importance likely to govern numerous cases arising out of mining leases in a specific territory - Case referred to a larger bench. (Para 1)
Facts of the case:
Appeals were filed concerning mining leases in a specific territory. After reviewing the judgment of the lower court and the relevant documents, the court observed that the matter involved significant legal questions.
Findings of Court:
The court found that the appeals involve a substantial question of law of great importance which is likely to govern a number of cases arising out of mining leases in the territory.
Issues: Whether the legal questions involved in the appeals regarding mining leases are of such importance that the matter should be referred to a larger bench.
Ratio Decidendi: Where a case involves a substantial question of law of great importance that is likely to have a wide-reaching impact on numerous other cases, the matter should be placed before a larger bench for determination.
Result: Case placed before a larger bench.
Facts of the case:
Appeals were filed concerning mining leases in a specific territory. After reviewing the judgment of the lower court and the relevant documents, the court observed that the matter involved significant legal questions.
Findings of Court:
The court found that the appeals involve a substantial question of law of great importance which is likely to govern a number of cases arising out of mining leases in the territory.
Issues: Whether the legal questions involved in the appeals regarding mining leases are of such importance that the matter should be referred to a larger bench.
Ratio Decidendi: Where a case involves a substantial question of law of great importance that is likely to have a wide-reaching impact on numerous other cases, the matter should be placed before a larger bench for determination.
Result: Case placed before a larger bench.
Legal Category Hierarchy
Table of Contents
2. Appeals involve a substantial question of law of great importance likely to govern numerous cases concerning mining leases. (Para 1 )
3. Matters involving substantial questions of law of great importance may be referred to a larger bench. (Para 1 )
4. Appeals referred to a larger bench. (Para 1 )
5. When may a case be referred to a larger bench?
A case may be referred to a larger bench when it involves a substantial question of law of great importance that is likely to govern a number of other cases. (Para 1 )
SYED M.FAZAL ALI, J.
(1) AFTER having heard counsel for the parties we reserved judgment. On going through the judgment of the Judicial Commissioner and the documents and after a careful consideration of the arguments of the parties, we find that these appeals involve a substantial question of law of great importance which is likely to govern a number of cases arising out of mining leases in the present territory of Goa, Daman & Diu. We, therefore, direct that this case be placed before a larger bench. Let these appeals be placed before the Honble the chief justice for orders.
