HARDEEP KAUR versus MALKIAT KAUR

HARDEEP KAUR versus MALKIAT KAUR

The judgment of the High Court is rendered unsustainable because no substantial question of law was formulated before hearing and deciding the second appeal, which is a mandatory requirement under Section 100 CPC.

Parties
Appellant: Hardeep Kaur; Respondent: Malkiat Kaur
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
16 March 2012
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Judgment Dated 09.03.2011
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Second Appeal, Formulation of Substantial Question of Law
Civil Procedure Second Appeal Formulation of Substantial Question of Law

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 21 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Hardeep Kaur

Appellant

Malkiat Kaur

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Judgment Dated 09.03.2011

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a second appeal lies only on a substantial question of law
  2. 2 Whether it is essential for the High Court to formulate a substantial question of law before interfering with the judgment and decree of the lower appellate court

Ratio Decidendi

The judgment of the High Court is rendered unsustainable because no substantial question of law was formulated before hearing and deciding the second appeal, which is a mandatory requirement under Section 100 CPC.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Impugned judgment of High Court set aside
  • Second appeal restored to file of High Court for fresh consideration in accordance with law