NEK PAL & ORS. versus NAGAR PALIKA PARISHAD & ORS.

NEK PAL & ORS. versus NAGAR PALIKA PARISHAD & ORS.

Because the High Court did not formulate substantial questions of law at the time of admission or give notice to the parties that the appeal would be heard on specific substantial questions of law, its final hearing of the second appeal was illegal; the impugned judgment is set aside and the appeals are restored to the High Court to frame substantial questions of law (if it desires) and fix a date for hearing.

Parties
Appellants: Nek Pal & Ors.; Respondents: Nagar Palika Parishad & Ors.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
26 July 2024
Procedural Posture
Second Appeal Under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 / Hearing on Admission and Formulation of Substantial Questions of Law; Impugned High Court Judgment Dated 13.11.2017 Set Aside and Appeals Restored to High Court for Framing and Hearing
Outcome
Appeals partly allowed
Legal Topics
Formulation of Question of Law Under Section 100 CPC, Substantial Question of Law for Second Appeal, Second Appeal
Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 Civil Procedure Formulation of Question of Law Under Section 100 CPC Substantial Question of Law for Second Appeal Second Appeal

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 1 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Nek Pal & Ors.

Appellants

Nagar Palika Parishad & Ors.

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Second Appeal Under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 / Hearing on Admission and Formulation of Substantial Questions of Law; Impugned High Court Judgment Dated 13.11.2017 Set Aside and Appeals Restored to High Court for Framing and Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether substantial questions of law are required to be formulated at the time of admission of a second appeal under Section 100 CPC or at any time subsequent thereto
  2. 2 Whether a second appeal can be finally heard without framing substantial questions of law
  3. 3 Whether the High Court erred in not giving notice to the parties that the appeal would be heard on specific substantial questions of law

Ratio Decidendi

Because the High Court did not formulate substantial questions of law at the time of admission or give notice to the parties that the appeal would be heard on specific substantial questions of law, its final hearing of the second appeal was illegal; the impugned judgment is set aside and the appeals are restored to the High Court to frame substantial questions of law (if it desires) and fix a date for hearing.

Court Disposition

Appeals partly allowed

Orders

  • Impugned judgment dated 13th November, 2017 is set aside
  • Second Appeal Nos.34/2003 and 48/2003 are restored to the file of the High Court of Uttarakhand at Nainital