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

2015 Supreme(Online)(SC) 255

SUPREME COURT
B. N. Agrawal, G. S. Singhvi, JJ.
Devarasu v. Veerasekaran and Another


Table of Content
1. court ruled on appeal process. (Para 2)
2. violation of s.100 procedural norms. (Para 3)
3. case remitted for proper hearing. (Para 4)

1. Leave granted.

2. The suit filed by the appellant for declaration of title and permanent injunction was decreed by the trial Court vide judgment dated 31.1.1995. The appeal preferred by the respondents was dismissed by District Judge, Villupuram but the second appeal filed by them has been allowed by the High Court and suit of the plaintiff - appellant dismissed. Hence, this appeal by special leave.

3. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and scrutinized the records. In our opinion, the impugned judgment is liable to be set aside only on the ground of violation of S.100 of the Code of Civil Procedure . Sub-section (1) of S.100 lays down that an appeal shall lie to the High Court from every decree passed in appeal by any court subordinate to the High Court, if the High Court is satisfied that the case involves a substantial question of law. Sub-section (4) lays down that where the High Court is satisfied that a substantial question of law is involved in any case, it shall formulate that question. In terms of sub-S.5, the a

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