Case Note & Summary
The case involved a civil appeal before the Supreme Court concerning the procedural correctness of a High Court order. The appellant, Digambar, challenged the High Court's decision to allow a second appeal without formulating a substantial question of law, which is a prerequisite under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. The Supreme Court noted that the High Court had failed to adhere to this mandatory requirement, which warranted the setting aside of its order. The court emphasized the importance of formulating a substantial question of law in second appeals to ensure proper judicial scrutiny. Consequently, the Supreme Court allowed the civil appeal, set aside the impugned order, and remitted the case back to the High Court for fresh consideration, instructing it to formulate any substantial question of law that may arise. This decision underscored the procedural safeguards intended to uphold the integrity of appellate review.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure - Second Appeal - Formulation of Substantial Question of Law - Mandatory Requirement - Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Section Not Mentioned - The High Court allowed a second appeal without formulating a substantial question of law, which is a mandatory requirement. The Supreme Court held that the absence of such formulation rendered the High Court's order fit to be set aside, directing the matter to be remitted for fresh disposal (Paras Not Mentioned).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the High Court erred in allowing the second appeal without formulating a substantial question of law.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court allowed the civil appeal, set aside the High Court's order, and remitted the second appeal for fresh disposal after formulating a substantial question of law.
Law Points
- Substantial question of law
- second appeal
- mandatory requirement
- High Court jurisdiction
