AIR 2001 SUPREME COURT 1273 ::2001 AIR SCW 1184 ::(2001) 2 MarriLJ 195 ::2001 (2) Marr LJ 195 ::(2001) WLC(SC)CVL 337 ::2001 (4) SCC 262 ::2001 (2) RecCivR 277 ::(2001) 2 Scale 634 ::(2001) 2 ICC 1 ::(2001) 2 Pun LR 492 ::(2001) 2 SCJ 429 ::(2001) 2 LandLR 41 ::2001 (2) LRI 678 ::2001 (2) Supreme 556 ::(2001) 2 CurLJ(CCR) 122 ::2001 (6) SRJ 400 ::(2001) 4 JT 158 (SC)

Supreme Court Of India

(From : Punjab and Haryana)*

Hon'ble Judge(s): Ajay Prakash Misra, U. C. Banerjee , JJ

(A) Civil P.C. (5 of 1908) , S.100— Constitution of India , Art.254— Punjab Courts Act (6 of 1918) , S.41— Second Appeal - Applicability of S. 100 vis-a-vis S. 41 Punjab Courts Act - Requirement of framing substantial question of law as per S. 100 of CPC as amended by Act of 1976 - Cannot be excluded by provision of S. 41 of Punjab Courts Act - S. 41 of Punjab Courts Act expressly in conflict with amending law, stand repealed in view of S. 97(1) of Civil P.C. (Amendment Act) 1976. RSA No. 1335 of 1986, D/- 6-2-1989 (Punj and Har), Reversed.AIR 1978 Punj and Har 137, Overruled. On the incorporation of the amendment to S. 100 of Code by Amendment Act of 1976 the power to entertain a Second Appeal by the High Court stands restricted only on such occasions when the High Court is otherwise satisfied about the involvement of a substantial question of law. The addition of this new concept of substantial question was not available in the Code of Civil Procedure prior to the amendment or in the Punjab Courts Act, 1918. The question arose before Court was whether two Acts can be termed to be inconsistent with each other or in view of saving provision of S. 4 of C.P.C. and S. 100(1) of C.P.C. the Punjab Act shall stand saved. The Court negativing submission that since the inconsistency have developed between two provisions only after amendment and specia....