Case Note & Summary
The dispute originated from a civil suit for declaration of tenancy, eviction, and other reliefs filed by the plaintiff against the defendant concerning a shop property. The trial court partially decreed the suit, directing the defendant to deliver vacant possession. The defendant's first appeal was dismissed by the appellate court. Subsequently, the defendant filed a regular second appeal before the High Court, which dismissed it in limine without providing reasons, merely stating it found no question of law for admission. The defendant appealed to the Supreme Court, contending that the High Court's order was unreasoned and that the appeal involved substantial questions of law. The core legal issue was whether the High Court was justified in dismissing the second appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) without assigning reasons. The appellant argued that the findings of the lower courts were legally flawed and that the High Court should have entertained the appeal to consider these questions. The respondent supported the High Court's order. The Supreme Court analyzed Section 100 CPC and Order XLII, emphasizing that a second appeal lies only when a substantial question of law is involved. It referenced the precedent in Surat Singh (Dead) v. Siri Bhagwan and Others, which mandates that the High Court must assign reasons when dismissing a second appeal in limine, as this demonstrates conscious application of mind and allows the affected party to understand the decision. The Court held that since the High Court failed to provide reasons for its conclusion that no substantial question of law existed, the order was unsustainable. Accordingly, the Supreme Court allowed the appeal, set aside the High Court's order, and remitted the matter back to the High Court for fresh disposal in accordance with law, with no order as to costs.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure - Second Appeal - Dismissal Without Reasons - Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Section 100 - High Court dismissed second appeal in limine without recording reasons for concluding no substantial question of law existed - Supreme Court held that High Court must assign reasons when dismissing second appeal at admission stage to demonstrate conscious application of mind and allow adversely affected party to understand basis of decision - Order set aside and matter remanded for fresh disposal (Paras 14-16). B) Civil Procedure - Second Appeal - Substantial Question of Law - Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Section 100 - Appeal involved question of whether High Court properly dismissed second appeal without reasons - Court examined statutory requirements under Section 100 CPC and Order XLII regarding formulation of substantial questions of law - Held that High Court must record reasons when concluding appeal does not involve substantial question of law (Paras 8-15).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the High Court was justified in dismissing the second appeal, filed under Section 100 of the CPC, in limine without assigning any reasons.
Final Decision
Appeal allowed. Order of the High Court dated 31.07.2019 set aside. Matter remitted back to the High Court for fresh disposal in accordance with law and in light of observations made. No order as to costs.
Law Points
- Second appeal under Section 100 CPC requires High Court to record reasons when dismissing in limine
- High Court must apply mind and assign reasons for concluding no substantial question of law exists
- Procedure under Order XLII CPC applies to second appeals
- Substantial question of law is prerequisite for entertaining second appeal
