Case Note & Summary
The case involved an appeal against the judgment and order of the High Court of Judicature at Madras concerning Second Appeal No. 1748 of 2000. The Supreme Court noted that the High Court had disposed of the second appeal without framing a substantial question of law, which is a requirement under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. The court highlighted that the High Court must be satisfied that a substantial question of law is involved and must formulate that question in the memorandum of appeal. The Supreme Court reiterated that the High Court's failure to comply with this procedural requirement rendered its judgment impermissible and unsustainable. Consequently, the Supreme Court set aside the High Court's judgment and remanded the case for proper disposal in accordance with the law, allowing the appeal without costs.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure - Second Appeal - Requirement of Framing Substantial Question of Law - Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Section 100 - High Court's failure to frame a substantial question of law in a second appeal rendered its judgment unsustainable. The court emphasized that the High Court can only entertain a second appeal if it is satisfied that a substantial question of law is involved, and it must formulate that question. Held that the appeal was allowed and the case was remanded for proper disposal (Paras 1-2).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the High Court erred in disposing of the second appeal without framing a substantial question of law as required under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court set aside the judgment and order of the High Court and remanded the case for disposal in accordance with law, allowing the appeal without costs.
Law Points
- Second Appeal
- substantial question of law
- framing of issues
- Code of Civil Procedure
- 1908
