ARIJIT PASAYAT, P.SATHASIVAM, AFTAB ALAM
Kashmir Singh – Appellant
Versus
Harnam Singh – Respondent
JUDGMENT:
Dr. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J.
1. Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment of a learned Single Judge of the Punjab and Haryana High Court allowing the Second Appeal filed by respondent No.1. The Second Appeal was filed under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (in short the Code). Though many points were urged in support of the appeal it was primarily submitted that no substantial question of law was formulated and Second appeal would not have been allowed without formulating any such question.
2. In view of Section 100 of the Code the memorandum of appeal shall precisely state substantial question or questions of law involved in the appeal as required under sub-section (3) of Section 100. Where the High Court is satisfied that in any case any substantial question of law is involved it shall formulate that question under sub-section (4) and the second appeal has to be heard on the question so formulated as stated in sub-section (5) of Section 100.
3. Section 100 of the Code deals with "Second Appeal". The provision reads as follows:
"Section 100- (1) Save as otherwise expressly provided in the body of this Code or by any other law for the time being in force, an
Rimmalapudi Subba Rao v. Noony Veeraju
REFERRED TO : Ishwar Dass Jain v. Sohan Lal
Kondiba Dogadu Kadam v. Savitribai Sopan Gujar and Others
Sir Chunilal V. Mehta and Sons Ltd. v. Century Spg. and Mfg. Co. Ltd.
Reserve Bank of India v. Ramkrishna Govind Morey
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.