Summary
The Supreme Court restored a group of property second appeals for fresh High Court determination because the court had altered inheritance rights without framing substantial questions of law. Framing and answering such questions was a jurisdictional prerequisite to allowing the second appeals under Section 100 CPC. The Supreme Court made no finding on the disputed relationship, inheritance or effect of prior litigation.
Issues
- Whether the High Court could modify the first appellate judgment without framing substantial questions of law.
- What procedure was required on remand.
Held
- A High Court allowing a second appeal must first formulate the substantial questions of law arising and then decide the appeal by answering them. No such questions had been framed at admission or before final hearing here, despite interference with the first appellate judgment. (¶ 4–7)
- All connected second appeals were restored. The High Court was to frame the questions arising in the respective appeals and decide independently on merits, without influence from either the impugned judgment or the Supreme Court’s remand observations. (¶ 8–11)
Result
Appeals allowed. Common High Court judgment set aside and all connected second appeals restored for formulation of substantial questions of law and fresh merits adjudication. Substantive property rights left open.