NARAYANAN RAJENDRAN & ANOTHER versus LEKSHMY SAROJINI & OTHERS

NARAYANAN RAJENDRAN & ANOTHER versus LEKSHMY SAROJINI & OTHERS

The High Court acted beyond its jurisdiction under Section 100 CPC by interfering with concurrent factual findings without formulating a substantial question of law. The legislative mandate confines second appeals to substantial questions of law only; thus, its judgment was unsustainable and was set aside.

Parties
Appellant: Narayanan Rajendran; Respondent: Lekshmy Sarojini; Respondent: Others
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
12 February 2009
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal to Supreme Court From High Court Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed; judgment of High Court set aside; findings of trial court and first appellate court restored.
Legal Topics
Second Appeal, Substantial Question of Law, Customary Law, Inheritance, Partition
Civil Procedure Second Appeal Substantial Question of Law Customary Law Inheritance Partition

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 36 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Narayanan Rajendran

Appellant

Lekshmy Sarojini

Respondent

Others

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal to Supreme Court From High Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the High Court in second appeal under Section 100 CPC was justified in interfering with concurrent findings of fact by courts below without formulating substantial question of law
  2. 2 Whether the suit property was subtarwad property and subject to partition under customary law

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court acted beyond its jurisdiction under Section 100 CPC by interfering with concurrent factual findings without formulating a substantial question of law. The legislative mandate confines second appeals to substantial questions of law only; thus, its judgment was unsustainable and was set aside.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; judgment of High Court set aside; findings of trial court and first appellate court restored.

Orders

  • The findings of the trial court as upheld by the first appellate court are restored.
  • The impugned judgment of the High Court is set aside.