Summary
The Court set aside a summary dismissal of a second appeal consisting only of a bare declaration of dismissal. The High Court had to explain why the appeal disclosed no substantial question of law, addressing the relevant facts and submissions. If such a question arose, it had to be formulated before final hearing.
Issues
- Whether an unreasoned summary dismissal satisfied the requirements governing second appeals.
Provisions considered
- Order XLI Rule 31, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908The reproduced rule required points for determination, decisions, reasons and, where applicable, the relief following reversal; the Court applied these requirements alongside Section 100. (¶ 11–16)
Held
- Even refusal to admit a second appeal required reasons explaining why no substantial question of law arose. A bare dismissal without facts, submissions or reasons was legally unsustainable. (¶¶ 8–10, 14–17)
- If a substantial question of law was found, the High Court had to formulate it before hearing the second appeal finally; the Supreme Court left that assessment and the partition merits for remand. (¶¶ 8, 15–18)
Result
Appeal allowed; summary dismissal set aside and second appeal remanded for fresh hearing in accordance with law.