JAICHAND (DEAD) THROUGH LRS. & ORS. versus SAHNULAL & ANR.

JAICHAND (DEAD) THROUGH LRS. & ORS. versus SAHNULAL & ANR.

The High Court erred in admitting and deciding the second appeal on a non-substantial question of law and in disturbing the well-reasoned findings of the first appellate court; under Section 100 CPC the High Court cannot substitute its view for that of the first appellate court except on limited legal grounds, and the impugned High Court order was set aside accordingly; instead of granting specific performance the Supreme Court directed refund of a quantified amount with conditional restoration of the trial decree if repayment is not made.

Parties
Appellants: Jaichand (Dead) Through Lrs. & Ors.; Respondents: Sahnulal & Anr.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
10 December 2024
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal to Supreme Court From High Court Judgment in Second Appeal Under Section 100 CPC
Outcome
Appeals allowed; judgment and order of the High Court set aside; directions issued regarding refund and conditional restoration of trial decree.
Legal Topics
Second Appeal, Substantial Question of Law, Framing of Substantial Question of Law, Scope of Section 100 CPC, Specific Performance, Readiness and Willingness, Hardship Under Section 20(2)(b) Specific Relief Act
Civil Procedure Specific Relief Second Appeal Substantial Question of Law Framing of Substantial Question of Law Scope of Section 100 CPC Specific Performance Readiness and Willingness +1 more

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 6 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jaichand (Dead) Through Lrs. & Ors.

Appellants

Sahnulal & Anr.

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal to Supreme Court From High Court Judgment in Second Appeal Under Section 100 CPC

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the High Court in a second appeal under Section 100 CPC can interfere with findings of fact recorded by the first appellate court
  2. 2 Whether the High Court correctly framed a substantial question of law for admission of the second appeal
  3. 3 Whether the first appellate court was justified in denying decree of specific performance on grounds of plaintiff's readiness and willingness and on alleged hardship to the defendant under Section 20(2)(b) Specific Relief Act

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court erred in admitting and deciding the second appeal on a non-substantial question of law and in disturbing the well-reasoned findings of the first appellate court; under Section 100 CPC the High Court cannot substitute its view for that of the first appellate court except on limited legal grounds, and the impugned High Court order was set aside accordingly; instead of granting specific performance the Supreme Court directed refund of a quantified amount with conditional restoration of the trial decree if repayment is not made.

Court Disposition

Appeals allowed; judgment and order of the High Court set aside; directions issued regarding refund and conditional restoration of trial decree.

Orders

  • High Court judgment and order dated 23.03.2021 and 24.06.2022 set aside.
  • Appeals allowed and High Court order quashed; judgment and decree of first appellate court restored to the extent indicated in reasoning.