LexJAWALA SINGH (D) BY LRS. AND ORS. versus JAGAT SINGH (D) BY LRS. AND ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A B JA WALA SINGH (D) BY LRS. AND ORS. JAGAT SINGH (D) BY LRS. AND ORS. SEPTEMBER 6, 2006 [ARIJIT PASA YAT AND S.H. KAPADIA, JJ.] Code of Civil Procedure, 1908-Section JOO-Second appea/- Maintainabi/ity of, when substantial question of law not formulated-Held: C Not maintainable. The question which has arisen for consideration in these appeals is whether High Court erred in allowing the second appeal without formulating any question of law for adjudication. Respondent contended that though specific que~tion of law was not D formulated, the High Court had analyzed the evidence and kept to the correct conclusion. Disposing of the appeals and remitting the matter to High Court so far as it relates to Second Appeal No.1832of1979, the Court E HELD: I. The memorandum of appeal shall precisely state substantial question or questions involved in the appeal as required under sub-section (3) of Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. 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 F 100. J757-EJ G H 2. A perusal of the impugned judgment passed by the High Court does not show that ariy substantial question of law has been formulated or that the second appeal was heard on a question, if any, so formulated. That being so, the judgment cannot be maintained. 1756-D I lshwar Dass Jain v. Sohan Lal, 120001 l SCC 434; Kanhaiyala/ v. Anupkumar, 1200311SCC430; Chadat Singh v. Bahadur Ram, 1200416 SCC 359; Joseph Severane and Ors. v. Benny Mathew and Ors., 12005) 7 SCC 667; Sasikumar and Ors. v. Kunnath Che//appan Nair and Ors., 120051 12 SCC 588 and Gian Dass v. The Gram Panchayat Village Sunner Kalan and Ors., 754 •• JAWALASINGH(D) BYLRS. v. JAGATSINGH (D) BY LRS. [PASAYAT.J.] 755 (2006) 5 Supreme 776, relied on. A CIVIL APPELL LATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. I 004 of 2003. From the Judgment and Order dated 16.5.2002 of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh in R.S.A. No. 1832/1979. WITH B ""' Civil Appeal No. 3938 of2006. Dr. Kailash Chand, Keshav Kaushik and Asha Gopalan Nair for the Appella:its. c M.H. Humayunisa and R. Nedumaran for the Respondents. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by ARIJIT PASAYAT, J. In these appeals challenge is to the judgment rendered by a learned Single Judge of the Punjab and Haryana High Court D allowing the Second Appeal filed under Section I 00 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (in shoJ"! the 'CPC'). The Second appeal was partially allowed by setting aside the judgment and decree of the First appellate Court in the plaintiffs suit for possession to the extent of land measuring 36 kanals comprised in Khasra Nos. 646, 647 and 648. E Though many points were urged basically itwas urged that the Second appeal was allowed without formulating any question of law for adjudication. This according to appellants rendered the judgment vulnerable. Learned counsel for the respondents submitted that though specific question of law was not formulated, the' High Court analysed the evidence F J and kept to the correct conclusion. Section I 00 of the Code deals with "second appeal". The provision reads as follows: "I 00( I). Save as otherwise expressly provided in the body of this G Code or by any other law for the time being in force, 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. ( • (2) An appeal may lie under this section from an appellate decree H 756 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2006] SUPP. 5 S.C.R. A passed ex parte. • r (3) In an appeal under this section, the memorandum of appeal shall precisely state the substantial question of law involved in the appeal. (4) Where the High Court is satisfied that a substantial question of B law is involved in any case, it shall formulate that question. (5) The appeal shall be heard on the question so formulated and the • respondent shall, at the hearing of the appeal, be allowed to argue that the case does not involve such question: c Provided that nothing in this sub-section shall be deemed to take away or abridge the power of the court to hear, for reasons to be recorded, the appeal on any other
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.