Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Nabakishore Mohanta
Vs.
Janardan Patra
Decided on August 30, 2000
Substantial Question of Law - Appeal Jurisdiction - The High Court's failure to frame a substantial question of law before deciding the appeal on merits led to the judgment being set aside.
Fact of the Case:
The plaintiff filed a suit for declaration of title, confirmation of possession, and permanent injunction. The suit was decreed, but the High Court, in second appeal, set aside the decree and dismissed the suit.
Finding of the Court:
The Court found that the High Court had decided the appeal on merits without framing any substantial question of law, which was required by the provisions of Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure. As a result, the judgment under appeal was set aside, and the case was sent back to the High Court for deciding the matter in accordance with the provisions of Section 100.
Issues: Failure to frame substantial question of law before deciding the appeal on merits.
Ratio Decidendi: The High Court's jurisdiction to decide the appeal on merits is contingent upon framing a substantial question of law as required by Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
Final Decision: The appeal was allowed, and the case was sent back to the High Court for deciding the matter in accordance with the provisions of Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure. No order as to costs was made since none appeared for the respondents.
( 1 ) THE plaintiff filed a suit for declaration of title, confirmation of possession and permanent injunction. The said suit was decreed. The first Appellate Court upheld the decree passed by the trial court. However, the High court, in second appeal, set aside the decree passed by the lower court and the suit was dismissed. It is against the said judgment of the High Court, the plaintiff is in appeal before us
( 2 ) LEARNED Counsel, appearing for the appellant, argued that this case requires to be sent back to the High Court for the reason that the High Court, before deciding the appeal on merit, has not framed any substantial question of law. He further argued that the High Court does not acquire any jurisdiction to decide the appeal on merits, unless it frames the substantial question of law. On perusal of the judgment, we find that the High Court, without framing any substantial question of law, has decided the appeal on merits. We are, therefore, in agreement with the argument of the learned Counsel for the appellant that the judgment under appeal deserves to be set aside and accordingly, it is set aside.
( 3 ) THE appeal is allowed. The case is sent back to the High Court for deciding the matter in accordance with the provisions of Section 100 of Code of Civil Procedure. Since none has appeared for the respondents, there shall be no order as to costs.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
