Case Note & Summary
The case involved an appeal against a judgment dated 13th September, 2006, from the High Court of Punjab & Haryana, which had reversed the decision of the First Appellate Court and restored the Trial Court's finding regarding a Will dated 31st May, 1979. The Supreme Court noted that the High Court had failed to formulate a substantial question of law before deciding the appeal, which is a requirement under Section 100 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908. The Court emphasized that allowing a second appeal without such formulation is a clear error and contrary to legal mandates. Consequently, the Supreme Court allowed the appeal, set aside the High Court's judgment, and remitted the matter back to the High Court for a fresh decision in accordance with the law, ensuring that a substantial question of law is framed. The Court did not impose any costs.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure - Second Appeal - Substantial Question of Law - Requirement to Frame - Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Section 100 - The High Court allowed a second appeal without formulating a substantial question of law, which is contrary to established legal principles. The Supreme Court held that the failure to frame such a question necessitated the setting aside of the High Court's judgment and remitting the matter for fresh consideration (Paras 1-2).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the High Court erred in allowing the second appeal without framing a substantial question of law.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, set aside the High Court's judgment, and remitted the matter back to the High Court for fresh decision in accordance with law after formulating the substantial question of law.
Law Points
- Second appeal
- substantial question of law
- Civil Procedure Code
- 1908
- Section 100
