“To be ‘substantial’, a question of law must be…”. Supreme Court summarises principles relating to Section 100 CPC
Supreme Court: The bench of Indira Banerjee* and JK Maheshwari, JJ has explained that to be ‘substantial’, a question of law must
section 100 cpc
High Court cannot dismiss second appeal in limine without assigning any reasons: SC
“Giving reasons for the conclusion is necessary as it helps the adversely affected party to understand why his submissions were not accepted.”
Ori HC | Adverse possession is a right which comes into play not just because someone loses his right to reclaim the property out of continuous and wilful neglect but also on account of possessor’s positive intent to dispossess-one
Orissa High Court: D. Dash J. dismissed the second appeal being devoid of merits. The Appellant filed the instant appeal under Section
Mere reference to factual aspects to conclude question of law does not mean facts and evidence have been reappreciated: SC restates law on second appeal under S. 100 CPC
Supreme Court: A 3-Judge Bench of N.V. Ramana, CJI and A.S. Bopanna and Hrishikesh Roy, JJ. upheld the judgment of the Madras
[Strict Liability] Ori HC | Onus of proof, which lies on a party alleging negligence should be established on the touchstone of preponderance of probabilities
Orissa High Court: D Dash J. dismissed the appeal and held the appellants liable for compensation. The facts of the case are
Chh HC | The word “sufficient cause” under S. 5 of Limitation Act should adopt a liberal and justice-oriented construction to advance justice
Chhattisgarh High Court: Sanjay K Agrawal J., allowed the appeal and condoned the delay while setting aside the impugned order. The facts
High Court not obliged to frame substantial question of law if no error is found in First Appellate Court’s findings; says SC
Supreme Court: The 3-judge bench of L. Nageswara Rao, Hemant Gupta* and Ajay Rastogi, JJ has held that the High Court is
HP HC | S. 100 CPC restricts the right of second appeal only to those cases where a substantial question of law is involved
Himachal Pradesh High Court: Jyotsna Rewal Dua J., dismissed the appeal on ground of impugned judgment/orders being devoid of any infirmity. The
Judgment deciding second appeal without formulation of substantial question law not valid: SC
Supreme Court: The bench of Navin Sinha and Indira Banerjee, JJ has held that when no substantial question of law is formulated,
SC yet again reminds the High Courts of the limitations under Section 100 CPC
Supreme Court: The Court, yet again, reminded the High Courts of the limitations under Section 100 CPC and said: “despite the catena