Case Note & Summary
The appeal arose from a judgment of the Punjab and Haryana High Court that allowed a Second Appeal filed by the respondent. The appellant contended that the High Court had not formulated any substantial question of law as required under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC). The Supreme Court noted that the High Court's judgment did not indicate any substantial question of law was formulated or that the appeal was heard on such a question. The Court emphasized that after the 1976 amendment to Section 100, it is essential for the High Court to formulate a substantial question of law before reversing the judgment of the first appellate court. The Supreme Court referred to previous judgments, including Ishwar Dass Jain v. Sohan Lal and Roop Singh v. Ram Singh, which reiterated that the jurisdiction of the High Court in second appeals is confined to substantial questions of law and does not extend to pure questions of fact. The Court also highlighted that mere possession does not convert permissive possession into adverse possession without evidence of hostile animus. The Supreme Court ultimately set aside the High Court's judgment and remitted the matter for fresh consideration, clarifying that the Second Appeal could only be maintained after formulating a substantial question of law. The appeal was allowed without any order as to costs.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure - Second Appeal - Formulation of Substantial Question of Law - Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Section 100 - The High Court failed to formulate a substantial question of law before allowing the Second Appeal, which is a prerequisite under Section 100. The Supreme Court held that the judgment of the High Court could not be maintained due to this procedural lapse (Paras 1-4).
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 set aside the impugned judgment of the High Court and remitted the matter for fresh consideration, stating that the Second Appeal could only be maintained after formulating a substantial question of law.
Law Points
- Second Appeal
- Substantial Question of Law
- High Court Jurisdiction
- Code of Civil Procedure
- 1908
- Section 100
- Concurrent Findings of Fact
