Summary
The High Court finally heard and decided a second appeal under Section 100 CPC without formulating substantial questions of law at admission or giving the parties notice of them before the hearing. The Supreme Court held this procedure illegal, set aside the judgment and restored the second appeals to the High Court's file, keeping all merits contentions open.
Issues
- Whether a High Court can finally hear and decide a second appeal under Section 100 CPC when no substantial question of law was formulated at admission and the parties were not told, before the hearing began, the questions on which the appeal would be heard.
Provisions considered
- Section 100, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908A second appeal can be finally heard only on substantial questions of law formulated earlier, at admission or later. The High Court had only recorded, part-way through arguments, that it was confining itself to three questions, without framing them beforehand and hearing the parties on them. The Court held this contrary to Section 100. (¶¶ 2, 3, 4)
Held
- Unless substantial questions of law are formulated at the time of admission or at some later stage, a second appeal cannot be finally heard, because it can be heard only on questions so formulated. Finally hearing a second appeal without framing any substantial question of law is itself illegal. (¶ 3)
- The parties must have notice, before the hearing begins, of the specific substantial questions on which the appeal will be heard. A High Court that only records during or after arguments that it has confined itself to certain questions has not complied; it could have framed the questions and taken up the appeal a few days later so that counsel had notice. (¶¶ 3, 4)
- On remand, the High Court may frame the questions indicated in its earlier judgment or additional substantial questions of law, and should then fix a hearing date bearing in mind that the second appeals were 21 years old. Interim relief operating until the impugned judgment would continue. (¶¶ 6, 7)
Result
Appeals partly allowed; High Court judgment dated 13.11.2017 set aside and Second Appeal Nos. 34 and 48 of 2003 restored to the High Court of Uttarakhand, to be listed before the roster Bench on 27.08.2024; merits kept open; earlier interim relief to continue.