CHANDRABHAN (DECEASED) THROUGH LRS. & ORS. versus SARASWATI & ORS.

CHANDRABHAN (DECEASED) THROUGH LRS. & ORS. versus SARASWATI & ORS.

The High Court erred in admitting and allowing the Second Appeal because there was no substantial question of law under Section 100 CPC; the First Appellate Court's finding that the appellant was adopted was based on evidence and did not involve an issue of law warranting interference, and therefore the High Court's judgment is set aside and the First Appellate Court's decree is restored.

Parties
Appellant: Chandrabhan (Deceased) through LRs. & Ors.; Respondent: Saraswati & Ors.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
22 September 2022
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal to Supreme Court Against High Court Judgment on Second Appeal Under Section 100 CPC
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Section 100 CPC, Second Appeal, Substantial Question of Law, Appellate Standard of Review, Admission and Appraisal of Evidence
Civil Procedure Adoption Property Section 100 CPC Second Appeal Substantial Question of Law Appellate Standard of Review Admission and Appraisal of Evidence

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 4 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Chandrabhan (Deceased) through LRs. & Ors.

Appellant

Saraswati & Ors.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal to Supreme Court Against High Court Judgment on Second Appeal Under Section 100 CPC

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the questions raised in the High Court constituted substantial questions of law within the meaning of Section 100 CPC
  2. 2 Whether the First Appellate Court acted on no evidence or ignored material evidence in finding adoption
  3. 3 What is the proper test to determine a 'substantial question of law' under Section 100 CPC

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court erred in admitting and allowing the Second Appeal because there was no substantial question of law under Section 100 CPC; the First Appellate Court's finding that the appellant was adopted was based on evidence and did not involve an issue of law warranting interference, and therefore the High Court's judgment is set aside and the First Appellate Court's decree is restored.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Impugned judgment and order dated 11 January 2016 of the High Court set aside
  • Judgment and order/decree of the First Appellate Court in Regular Civil Appeal No.361 of 1984 restored