Case Note & Summary
The dispute arose from a judgment of the Punjab & Haryana High Court regarding a Second Appeal. The appellant, Mohinder Singh, challenged the High Court's decision on the grounds that it was allowed without the necessary framing of substantial questions of law as mandated by Section 100 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908. The Supreme Court found that the High Court had indeed failed to comply with this procedural requirement. In its analysis, the Supreme Court emphasized the importance of framing substantial questions of law for the proper adjudication of appeals. Consequently, the Court set aside the High Court's judgment and remitted the matter back to the High Court for a fresh decision, ensuring that the necessary legal protocols were followed. The Court did not impose any costs on the parties involved. The judgment was delivered on March 30, 2009.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure - Substantial Question of Law - Requirement of Framing - Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Section 100 - The High Court allowed the Second Appeal without framing any substantial question of law, which is a requirement under the CPC. The Supreme Court set aside the High Court's judgment and remitted the matter for a fresh decision after proper framing of substantial questions of law. Held that adherence to procedural requirements is essential for the proper adjudication of appeals (Paras Not mentioned).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Punjab & Haryana High Court erred in allowing the Second Appeal without framing any substantial question of law.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court set aside the judgment of the Punjab & Haryana High Court and remitted the matter for a fresh decision after framing substantial questions of law, with no order as to costs.
Law Points
- Substantial question of law
- framing of questions
- Civil Procedure Code
- 1908
- Section 100
