New Delhi, November 16, 2020: The Supreme Court has observed that a High Court is not required to frame substantial question of law while dismissing a second appeal filed against the concurrent findings of the Trial Court and the First Appellate Court.

The Supreme Court Bench comprising of Justices L. Nageswara Rao, Hemant Gupta and Ajay Rastogi observed the formulation of substantial question of law or reformulation of the same arises only if there are some questions of law and not in the absence of any substantial question of law, while considering an appeal filed against the High Court judgment which dismissed a second appeal filed against the concurrent findings of the Trial Court and the First Appellate Court.

One of the contentions raised before the Top Court in the appeal was that the High Court dismissed the second appeal without framing any substantial question of law which is mandatory in terms of Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

Referring to Section 100 CPC, the bench observed. "Sub-section (1) of Section 100 of the Code contemplates that an appeal shall lie to the High Court if it is satisfied that the case involves a substantial question of law. The substantial question of law is required to be precisely stated in the memorandum of appeal.

If the High Court is satisfied that such substantial question of law is involved, it is required to formulate that question. The appeal has to be heard on the question so formulated.

However, the Court has the power to hear appeal on any other substantial question of law on satisfaction of the conditions laid down in the proviso of Section 100 of the Code.

Therefore, if the substantial question of law framed by the appellants are found to be arising in the case, only then the High Court is required to formulate the same for consideration. If no such question arises, it is not necessary for the High Court to frame any substantial question of law.

The formulation of substantial question of law or reformulation of the same in terms of the proviso arises only if there are some questions of law and not in the absence of any substantial question of law.

The High Court is not obliged to frame substantial question of law, in case, it finds no error in the findings recorded by the First Appellate Court."

The court noted that none of the judgments referred to by the appellant [except Md. Mohammad Ali (dead) by LRs v. Jagadish Kalita & Ors., (2004) 1 SCC 271] mandate the High Court to frame substantial questions of law while upholding the findings recorded by the First Appellate Court. In Md. Mohammad Ali, the Court had found that the High Court erred in dismissing the appeal without formulation of substantial question of law which arises for consideration. The bench noted the following observations made in, Ashok Rangnath Magar v. Shrikant Govindrao Sangvikar (2015) 16 SCC 763, in which it was held that the second appeal can be dismissed without even formulating the substantial question of law

News Courtesy:PIB | Hindu| DC | LE | LI | LO | IE | LL | PTI |ht | ET | UNI | DNA | FP | Jurist |IndToday|

Disclaimer: Information, facts or opinions expressed in this news article are presented as sourced supplied by the concerned either as press release, press statement or via other source of information, websearch engines and internet and do not reflect views of Lawtime and hence Lawtime is not responsible or liable for the same. As a source and news provider, India info Comm Network's website Lawtime.in is not responsible for any of the copy right violation or for accuracy, completeness, suitability and validity of any information in this news article

Comments

Name*:
Phone number:
Email address*:
Comments and questions*:
Enter web form code*: reload image * - required fields.