Finally Hearing Second Appeal Without Framing Any Substantial Question Of Law Illegal: Supreme Court
finally hearing a second appeal without framing any substantial question of law is itself illegal
The Supreme Court observed that unless substantial questions of law are formulated at the time of admission of the appeal or subsequently, a second appeal cannot be finally heard.
The Court was hearing a Civil Appeal where its attention was invited to the impugned judgment of the High Court in a Second Appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.
The bench of Justice Abhay S. Oka and Justice Augustine George Masih observed, “Unless substantial questions of law are formulated at the time of admission of the appeal or any time subsequent thereto, a second appeal cannot be finally heard.”
The Court noted that the impugned order indicated that at the time of admitting the second appeal under Section 100 of the CPC, substantial questions of law were not formulated.
The Court observed, “the act of finally hearing a second appeal without framing any substantial question of law is itself illegal.”
The Court said that the High Court did not put the rival Advocates to notice before the commencement of the hearing that it was proposing to hear the appeal on specific substantial questions of law. “The High Court could have framed substantial questions of law and heard the appeal after few days so that the Advocates had a notice that the appeal will be heard on specific substantial questions of law.”, the Court remarked.
Accordingly, the Court said that the procedure followed by the High Court is completely illegal and contrary to Section 100 of the CPC.
The Court set aside the impugned judgment and restored the Second Appeal to the file of the High Court of Uttarakhand at Nainital.
Finally, the Court allowed the Civil Appeals.
Cause Title: Nek Pal v. Nagar Palika Parishad (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 574)
