License & Printed By : | https://www.aironline.in |
AIR 2004 SUPREME COURT 1913 ::2004 AIR SCW 1618
Supreme Court Of India
Hon'ble Judge(s): R. C. Lahoti, A. R. Lakshmanan , JJ

(A) Civil P.C. (5 of 1908) , S.100— Second appeal - For exercising jurisdiction under S. 100 existence of substantial question of law is sine qua non. The jurisdiction of the High Court is now confined to entertain only such appeals as involved substantial question of law specifically set out in the memorandum of appeal and formulated by the High Court. Since the High Court has not adverted to the substantial question of law framed at the time of admission, the High Court has committed a patent error in disposing of the second appeal. The existence of a substantial question of law is thus, the sine qua non for the exercise of the jurisdiction under the amended provisions of Section 100, C.P.C. (B) Civil P.C. (5 of 1908) , S.100— Second Appeal - Scope - Roving enquiry into factual arena of case is not contemplated. The High Court would exceed its jurisdiction in reassessing, reappre-ciating and making a roving enquiry by entering into the factual arena of the case which is not the one contemplated under the limited scope of jurisdiction of a second appeal under S. 100, C.P.C. (C) Civil P.C. (5 of 1908) , S.100— Second appeal - Finding of fact based on evidence - Cannot be substituted merely on groun....

Buy and Download By Entering Following Details (Worth /-)

Step 1
Enter your contact details.
Please enter your name.
Please enter a valid 10 digit mobile number
Please enter your valid email id.
I agree on Terms & Conditions
Step 2
Enter your payment details

 J