LexHARDEEP KAUR versus MALKIAT KAUR
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A B [2012) 2 S.C.R. 478 HARDEEP KAUR v. MALKIAT KAUR ~Civil Appeal No. 2870 of 2012) MARCH 16, 2012 [R.M. LODHA AND H. L. GOKHALE, JJ.] Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 - s. 100 - Second appeal - Formulation of substantial question of law - Requirement of C - Held: Formulation of substantial question of law at the initial stage before hearing the second appeal is mandatory - Decision of the High Court is vitiated because no substantial question of law was formulated. 0 The question for consideration in the present appeal was whether a second appeal lies only on a substantial question of law and is it essential for the High Court to formulate a substantial question of law before interfering with the judgment and decree of the lower appellate court. E Allowing the appeal, the Court HELD: 1. As a matter of law, the High Court is required to formulate substantial question of law involved in the second appeal at the initial stage if it is satisfied F that the matter deserves to be admitted and the second appeal has to be heard and decided on such substantial question of law. In view of sub-section (5) of Section 100, at the time of hearing of second appeal, it is open to the High Court to re-formulate substantial question/s of law or formulate fresh substantial question/s of law or hold G that no substantial question of law is involved. The High Court cannot proceed to hear the second appeal without formulating a substantial question of law in the light of H 478 HARDEEP KAUR v. MALKIAT KAUR 479 the provisions contained in Section 100 CPC. [Para 10) A [484-H; 485-A-D] 2. The High Court ignored and overlooked the mandatory requirement of the secohd appellate jurisdiction as provided in Section 100 CPC and that vitiates its decision as no substantial question of law was 8 framed and yet the judgment and decr~e of the first appellate court was reversed. [Para 13) [489-E-F] Kshitish Chandra Purkait v. Santosh Kumar Purkait and Ors.(1997) 5 SCC 438: 1997 (1) Suppl. SCR 201; Dnyanoba C Bhaurao Shemade v. Maroti Bhaurao Marnor (1999) 2 SCC 471; Panchugopal Barua and Ors. v. Umesh Chandra Goswami and Ors. (1997) 4 SCC 713: 1997 (2) SCR 12; Sheet Chand v. Prakash Chand (1998) 6 SCC 683: 1998 (1) Suppl. SCR 297; Kanai Lal Garari and Ors. v. Murari Ganguly D and Ors. (1999) 6 SCC 35; /shwar Dass Jain (Dead) through .· L.Rs. v. Sohan Lal (Dead) by L.Rs. (2000) 1 SCC 434: 1999 (5) Suppl. SCR 24; Roop Singh (Dead) through L.Rs. v. Ram Singh (Dead) through L.Rs. (2000) 3 SCC 708: 2000 (2) SCR 605; Santosh Hazari v. Purushottam Tiwari (Deceased) by L.Rs. (2001) 3 SCC 179: 2001 (1) SCR 948; Chadat Singh E v. Bahadur Ram and Ors. (2004) 6 SCC 359: 2004 (3) Suppl. SCR 298; Sasikumar and Ors. v. Kunnath Chellappan Nair and Ors. (2005) 12 sec 588: 2005 (4) Suppl. SCR 363; C.A. Sulaiman and Ors. v. State Bank of Travancore, Alwayee and Ors. (2006) 6 SCC 392: 2006 (4) Suppl. SCR 152; Bokka F Subba Rao v. Kukkala Balakrishna and Ors. (2008) 3 SCC 99: 2008 (2) SCR 753; Narayanan Rajendran and Anr. v. Lekshmy Sarojini and Ors. (2009) 5 SCC 264: 2009 (2) SCR 71; Municipal Committee, Hoshiarpur v. Punjab State Electricity Board and Ors. (2010) 13 SCC 216: 2010 (13) G SCR 658; Umerkhan v. Bismillabi alias Babula/ Shaikh and Ors. (2011) 9 SCC 684; Shiv Cotex v. Tirgun Auto Plast Private Limited and Ors. (2011) 9 sec 678- relied on. M. S. V. Raja and Anr. v. Seeni The var and Ors. (2001) 6 SCC 652 :2001 (1) Suppl. SCR 513 - distinguished. H 480 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2012] 2 S.C.R. A Case Law Reference: 1997 (1) Suppl. SCR 201 Relied on Para 10 (1999) 2 sec 471 Relied on Para 10 B 1997 (2) SCR 12 Relied on Para 10 1998 (1) Suppl. SCR 297 Relied on Para 10 (1999) 6 sec 35 Relied on Para 10 1999 (5) Suppl. SCR 24 Relied on Para 10 c 2000 (2) SCR 605 Relied or. Para 10 2001 (1) SCR 948 Relied on Para 10 2004 (3) Suppl. SCR 298 Relied on Para 10 D 2005 (4) Suppl. SCR 363 Relied on Para 10 2006 (4) Suppl. SCR 152 Relied on Para 10 2008 (2) SCR 753 Relied on Para 10 E 2009 (2) SCR 71 Relied on Para 10 2010 (13) SCR 658 Relied on Para 10 (2011 > 9 sec 684 Relied on Para 11 F (2011 > 9 sec 678 Relied on Para 11 2001 (1) Suppl. SCR 513 Distinguished Para 13 CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 2870 of 2012. G From the Judgment & Order dated 09.03.2011 of the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh in Reg
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.