MADAN LAL AND ANR versus BAL KRISHAN AND ORS.

MADAN LAL AND ANR versus BAL KRISHAN AND ORS.

Judgment of High Court allowing second appeal without formulating substantial question of law cannot be maintained; matter remitted for disposal after formulation of such question.

Parties
Appellant: Madan Lal; Respondent: Bal Krishan; Appellant: Unknown (ANR, ORS); Respondent: Unknown (ORS)
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
14 November 2005
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Appeal From High Court Judgment
Outcome
Appeal disposed; impugned judgment set aside; matter remitted to High Court.
Legal Topics
Second Appeal, Substantial Question of Law, Section 100 CPC
Civil Procedure Second Appeal Substantial Question of Law Section 100 CPC

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 2 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Madan Lal

Appellant

Bal Krishan

Respondent

Unknown (ANR, ORS)

Appellant

Unknown (ORS)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Appeal From High Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether High Court can allow a second appeal without formulating a substantial question of law as mandated by Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908

Ratio Decidendi

Judgment of High Court allowing second appeal without formulating substantial question of law cannot be maintained; matter remitted for disposal after formulation of such question.

Court Disposition

Appeal disposed; impugned judgment set aside; matter remitted to High Court.

Orders

  • Matter remitted back to High Court for disposal after formulating substantial question of law, if any, and in accordance with law.
  • No order as to costs.