PATRICK JJ. SALDANHA versus ANTONY M. SALDANHA

Citation: [2007] 6 S.C.R. 124 · Decided: 08-05-2007 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: ARIJIT PASAYAT · Disposal: Disposed off
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

A 
PATRICK JJ. SALDANHA 
.r.,-
v. 
ANTONYM. SALDANHA 
MAY 8, 2007 
B 
[DR. ARIJITPASAYAT AND LOKESHWARSINGH PANTA, JJ.] 
Code a/Civil Procedure, 1908-Section JOO-Second appeal-Disposal 
of by High Court without formulating substantial question of law-Justification 
c of-Held: It is for the High Court to formulate a substantial question of law 
and hear the appeal on the question formulated-In absence of the same, 
such judgment cannot be maintained. 
The issue involved in this appeal was whether the High Court was 
justified in disposing of the second appeal without formulating the substantial 
D question of law, as mandated by Section 100 CPC. 
Disposing of tbe appeal, the Court 
~ 
HELD: 1.1. In view of Section 100 CPC, 1908, the memorandum of appeal 
.... 
shall precisely state substantial question or questions of law involved in the 
E appeal as required under sub-section (3) of Section 100. Where 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. (Para 31 (125-F-G) 
F 
1.2 .In the instant case, a perusal of the impugned judgment passed by 
High Court does not show that any substantial question of law has been 
formulated or that the second appeal was heard on the question, if any, so 
. .:\ 
formulated and as such the judgment cannot be maintained. The matters are 
remitted back to High Court for disposal in accordance with law. 
G 
[Paras S and 9) (126-D-E; 127-G) 
/shwar Dass Jain v. Sohan Lal, (200011 SCC 434; Roop Singh (dead) 
by LR's v. Ram Singh (dead) by LR's, [200013 SCC 708; Kanahaiyalal and 
Ors. v. Anupkumar and Ors., JT (2002) 10 SC 98; Premabai v. Jnaneshwar. · 
-4 
Ramakrishna Palange and Ors., (2003) AIR SCW 2922; Chadat Singh v. 
; 
H 
124 
,, 
PATRICKJJ. SALDANHAv. ANTONYM. SALDANHA [PASAYAT,J.] 125 
...,,.._ 
Bahadur Rama and Ors., JT (2004) 6 SC 296; Matha/ca/a Krishnaiah v. V . A. 
Rajagopa/, JT (2004) 9 SC 205; Shah Mansukhlal Chhaganial (dead) 
through Lrs. v. Gohi/ Amarsing Govindbhai (dead) through Lrs .. (2006) 13 
.... 
SCALE 99; Ravi Construction Co. v. Somvanshi Arya Ksatriya Samai and 
Ors., (2006) 9 SCALE 174; Jawa/a Singh (Dead) by LR's & Ors. v. Jagat 
Singh (Dead) by LR's & Ors .. JT (2006) 8 SC 483 and C.A. Sulaiman and B 
Ors. v. State Bank of Travancore Alwayee and Ors., AIR (2006) SC 2848, 
relied on. 
-,., . 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 414 of2001. 
.. 
From the Final Judgment and Order dated 06.08.1998 of the High Court c 
ofKamataka at Bangalore in R.S.A. No. 930of1991. 
S.S. Javeli, and P.R. Ramasesh for the Appellant. 
Naveen R. Nath and Lalit Mohini Bhat for the Respondent. 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
D 
...( 
DR. ARIJIT PASA YAT, J. I. Challenge in this appeal is to the order 
;>-
passed by a learned Single Judge of the Kamataka High Court allowing the 
Second Appeal (RSA No. 930 of 1991) filed by the respondent. 
2. Though many points are urged, primarily it was submitted that the E 
Second Appeal was allowed without formulating a substantial question of 
law. 
3. In view of Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (in short 
"The Code") the Memorandum of Appeal shall precisely state substantial F 
question or questions of law involved in the appeal as required under sub-
,. 
section (3) of Section I 00. 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. 
4. Section 100 of the Code deals with "Second Appeal". The provision G 
reads as follows: 
.... 
"Section 100- (I) Save as otherwise expressly provided in the body 
of this 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 H 
126 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2007) 6 S.C.R. 
A 
Court subordinate to the High Court, ifthe 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 
passed ex parte. 
B 
(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
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.