Supreme Court Dismisses Special Leave Petition Against Non-Order in Civil Appeal — Clarifies Scope of Article 136. The Court held that the admission of a second appeal does not constitute a final or interlocutory order under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

  • 0
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The dispute arose from a suit filed by the respondent for declaration and injunction against the petitioner, which was initially decreed. The petitioner appealed, leading to the first appellate court dismissing the suit. The respondent then filed a regular second appeal under section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC), which the High Court admitted, formulating three substantial questions of law. The petitioner contested the admission, arguing that the case did not involve any substantial question of law. The High Court's order of admission was challenged in a special leave petition before the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court analyzed the nature of the order admitting the second appeal, clarifying that it is neither a final order nor an interlocutory order, and does not decide any issue but merely allows the appeal to be heard. The Court emphasized that under Article 136, special leave can be granted against judgments or orders that decide issues, but not against orders that do not resolve any matter. The Court noted a growing trend of special leave petitions against such non-orders and dismissed the petition, reiterating that the case did not present extraordinary circumstances warranting intervention. The final decision was to dismiss the special leave petition.

Headnote

A) Civil Procedure - Second Appeal - Admission of Second Appeal - Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Section 100 - The admission of a second appeal does not constitute a final or interlocutory order, as it merely entertains the appeal for hearing without deciding any issue. The petitioner can argue that no substantial question of law arises during the hearing of the second appeal. Held that the special leave petition against such non-orders is dismissed (Paras 3-6).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the High Court's order admitting the second appeal constituted a final or interlocutory order under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The Supreme Court dismissed the special leave petition, clarifying that the admission of a second appeal does not constitute a final or interlocutory order and does not decide any issue.

Law Points

  • Second appeal
  • substantial questions of law
  • Article 136
  • non-final orders
  • discretionary power
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2009 LawText (SC) (11) 64

Special Leave Petition [C] No.29213 of 2009

2009-11-23

R.V. Raveendran, K.S. Radhakrishnan

M/s. S.B. Minerals

M/s. MSPL Limited

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Civil suit for declaration and injunction

Remedy Sought

Petitioner sought to challenge the admission of the second appeal

Filing Reason

Respondent filed a suit which was decreed, leading to an appeal and subsequent second appeal

Previous Decisions

First appellate court allowed the appeal and dismissed the suit

Issues

Whether the High Court's order admitting the second appeal constituted a final or interlocutory order

Submissions/Arguments

Petitioner argued that the case did not involve any substantial question of law Respondent sought leave to appeal against the order of admission

Ratio Decidendi

The admission of a second appeal under Section 100 of the CPC does not amount to a final or interlocutory order, and special leave petitions against such non-orders are generally not entertained.

Judgment Excerpts

An order admitting a second appeal is neither a final order nor an interlocutory/interim order. The scope of Article 136 is no doubt very wide.

Procedural History

The respondent filed a suit which was decreed, the petitioner appealed and the first appellate court dismissed the suit, leading to the respondent filing a second appeal which was admitted by the High Court.

Acts & Sections

  • Code of Civil Procedure, 1908: Section 100
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Gujarat High Court Allows Wife's Revision in Maintenance Case Under Section 125 CrPC, Quashes Set-Off Direction. Voluntary payments made by husband prior to filing of maintenance application cannot be set off against awarded maintenance under Section...
Related Judgement
High Court High Court of Gujarat Dismisses Petition for Appointment of Arbitrator in Coal Mining Services Agreement Dispute — No Arbitration Agreement Exists Between Petitioner and Respondent. Court holds that a consortium agreement does not create privity of...