{"id":220346,"date":"2019-09-30T11:00:17","date_gmt":"2019-09-30T05:30:17","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=220346"},"modified":"2019-10-04T12:51:02","modified_gmt":"2019-10-04T07:21:02","slug":"hp-hc-scope-of-interference-by-high-court-in-second-appeal-under-s-100-of-cpc-is-only-if-a-substantial-question-of-law-involved-in-appeal-appeal-dismissed-as-no-perversity-in-earlier-orders","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/09\/30\/hp-hc-scope-of-interference-by-high-court-in-second-appeal-under-s-100-of-cpc-is-only-if-a-substantial-question-of-law-involved-in-appeal-appeal-dismissed-as-no-perversity-in-earlier-orders\/","title":{"rendered":"HP HC | Scope of interference by High Court in Second Appeal under S. 100 of CPC is only if a substantial question of law involved; Appeal dismissed as no perversity in earlier orders"},"content":{"rendered":"

Himachal Pradesh High Court: <\/strong>Ajay Mohan Goel, J. dismissed the appeal on finding no substantial question of law involved in the appeal.<\/p>\n

Factual matrix of the case was that the plaintiff filed a suit for recovery of a certain amount along with the interest rate; the contract was based on mutual understanding and was a written one. The plaintiff contended that the defendant had executed a receipt or undertaking for the borrowings that were made. Allegedly defendant issued a cheque in favor of the plaintiff to discharge part liability but the same was dishonored. Subsequently, the plaintiff initiated proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The plaintiff submitted that thereafter the matter was compromised between the two, however, the balance amount is still due.<\/p>\n

On the contrary, the defendant submitted that the sum was never borrowed from the plaintiff neither any receipt was executed by him. The learned Trial Court had adjudicated the matter and framed several issues, like \u2018Whether plaintiff suppressed material facts from the Court\u2019 and \u2018Whether the plaintiff has no locus standi to file the present suit, as alleged?\u2019<\/p>\n

Trial Court decreed the suit in favor of the plaintiff on the basis of the evidence presented. The contention of defendant that the document presented was not the original receipt stood answered in negative by learned trial Court by holding that receipt was the original document and the objection raised by the defendant against the same was bad, especially as defendant in the witness box had admitted in his cross-examination that signatures on said receipt was his. The trial court had relied upon, Ajudya Lal v. Sandhya Devi, <\/em>HJL 2006 (2) 943, where the Court had held that \u2018there could not be evidence stronger than an admission by the parties in the civil cases<\/strong>.\u2019 Against the order of the Trial Court the defendant filed an appeal. However, the appeal was dismissed. Learned Appellate Court also took notice of the fact that the defendant in his statement had clearly admitted his signatures on the said exhibit. On this basis, learned Appellate Court had held that it was apparent that the defendant was yet to pay an amount to the plaintiff.<\/p>\n

Hence, the defendant now filed a second instant appeal aggrieved by the Judgment of trial court and Appellate Court, defendant had argued that the Judgments and decrees passed by both the learned Courts below were not sustainable in the eyes of law as the learned Courts below have erred in not appreciating that exhibit was a false and fabricated document and a scanned copy of the same was exhibited and suit could have been decreed by relying upon the said exhibit.<\/p>\n

On the contrary, the plaintiff had submitted that there was no perversity with the findings. He had further argued that as the allegation of the defendant was that the exhibit was a forged document, the onus was upon him to prove the said fact, which he was not able to prove. Accordingly, he urged that as the appeal sans merit, the same be dismissed.<\/p>\n

The Court, observed the concurrent findings by the Courts below and held that, \u201cThe scope of interference by the High Court in Second Appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure is only if the Court finds that there is substantial question of law involved in the appeal<\/em><\/strong>.\u201d Further, it was held that there was no substantial question of law involved in the case. Both the Courts have given the Judgment in favor of the plaintiff after examining all the evidence and pleadings. Hence, the appeal was dismissed.[Satyapal Kashyap v. P.P.S. Chhatwal,\u00a02019 SCC OnLine HP 1561<\/b><\/a>, decided on 19-09-2019]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Himachal Pradesh High Court: Ajay Mohan Goel, J. dismissed the appeal on finding no substantial question of law involved in the appeal. <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":8808,"featured_media":222107,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,10],"tags":[30967,37765,32534,25654,37764],"class_list":["post-220346","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-highcourts","tag-second-appeal","tag-section-100-of-code-of-civil-procedure","tag-section-138-of-negotiable-instruments-act","tag-substantial-question-of-law","tag-suit-for-recovery"],"yoast_head":"\nHP HC | Scope of interference by High Court in Second Appeal under S. 100 of CPC is only if a substantial question of law involved; Appeal dismissed as no perversity in earlier orders | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/09\/30\/hp-hc-scope-of-interference-by-high-court-in-second-appeal-under-s-100-of-cpc-is-only-if-a-substantial-question-of-law-involved-in-appeal-appeal-dismissed-as-no-perversity-in-earlier-orders\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"HP HC | Scope of interference by High Court in Second Appeal under S. 100 of CPC is only if a substantial question of law involved; Appeal dismissed as no perversity in earlier orders\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Himachal Pradesh High Court: Ajay Mohan Goel, J. dismissed the appeal on finding no substantial question of law involved in the appeal.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/09\/30\/hp-hc-scope-of-interference-by-high-court-in-second-appeal-under-s-100-of-cpc-is-only-if-a-substantial-question-of-law-involved-in-appeal-appeal-dismissed-as-no-perversity-in-earlier-orders\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2019-09-30T05:30:17+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2019-10-04T07:21:02+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/11\/Himachal-HC_1.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1330\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"887\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Bhumika Indulia\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Bhumika Indulia\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"3 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/09\/30\/hp-hc-scope-of-interference-by-high-court-in-second-appeal-under-s-100-of-cpc-is-only-if-a-substantial-question-of-law-involved-in-appeal-appeal-dismissed-as-no-perversity-in-earlier-orders\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/09\/30\/hp-hc-scope-of-interference-by-high-court-in-second-appeal-under-s-100-of-cpc-is-only-if-a-substantial-question-of-law-involved-in-appeal-appeal-dismissed-as-no-perversity-in-earlier-orders\/\",\"name\":\"HP HC | Scope of interference by High Court in Second Appeal under S. 100 of CPC is only if a substantial question of law involved; Appeal dismissed as no perversity in earlier orders | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/09\/30\/hp-hc-scope-of-interference-by-high-court-in-second-appeal-under-s-100-of-cpc-is-only-if-a-substantial-question-of-law-involved-in-appeal-appeal-dismissed-as-no-perversity-in-earlier-orders\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/09\/30\/hp-hc-scope-of-interference-by-high-court-in-second-appeal-under-s-100-of-cpc-is-only-if-a-substantial-question-of-law-involved-in-appeal-appeal-dismissed-as-no-perversity-in-earlier-orders\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/11\/Himachal-HC_1.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2019-09-30T05:30:17+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-10-04T07:21:02+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/09\/30\/hp-hc-scope-of-interference-by-high-court-in-second-appeal-under-s-100-of-cpc-is-only-if-a-substantial-question-of-law-involved-in-appeal-appeal-dismissed-as-no-perversity-in-earlier-orders\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/09\/30\/hp-hc-scope-of-interference-by-high-court-in-second-appeal-under-s-100-of-cpc-is-only-if-a-substantial-question-of-law-involved-in-appeal-appeal-dismissed-as-no-perversity-in-earlier-orders\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/09\/30\/hp-hc-scope-of-interference-by-high-court-in-second-appeal-under-s-100-of-cpc-is-only-if-a-substantial-question-of-law-involved-in-appeal-appeal-dismissed-as-no-perversity-in-earlier-orders\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/11\/Himachal-HC_1.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/11\/Himachal-HC_1.jpg\",\"width\":1330,\"height\":887},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/09\/30\/hp-hc-scope-of-interference-by-high-court-in-second-appeal-under-s-100-of-cpc-is-only-if-a-substantial-question-of-law-involved-in-appeal-appeal-dismissed-as-no-perversity-in-earlier-orders\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"HP HC | Scope of interference by High Court in Second Appeal under S. 100 of CPC is only if a substantial question of law involved; Appeal dismissed as no perversity in earlier orders\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a\",\"name\":\"Bhumika Indulia\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg\",\"caption\":\"Bhumika Indulia\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_1\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"HP HC | Scope of interference by High Court in Second Appeal under S. 100 of CPC is only if a substantial question of law involved; Appeal dismissed as no perversity in earlier orders | SCC Times","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/09\/30\/hp-hc-scope-of-interference-by-high-court-in-second-appeal-under-s-100-of-cpc-is-only-if-a-substantial-question-of-law-involved-in-appeal-appeal-dismissed-as-no-perversity-in-earlier-orders\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"HP HC | Scope of interference by High Court in Second Appeal under S. 100 of CPC is only if a substantial question of law involved; Appeal dismissed as no perversity in earlier orders","og_description":"Himachal Pradesh High Court: Ajay Mohan Goel, J. dismissed the appeal on finding no substantial question of law involved in the appeal.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/09\/30\/hp-hc-scope-of-interference-by-high-court-in-second-appeal-under-s-100-of-cpc-is-only-if-a-substantial-question-of-law-involved-in-appeal-appeal-dismissed-as-no-perversity-in-earlier-orders\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2019-09-30T05:30:17+00:00","article_modified_time":"2019-10-04T07:21:02+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1330,"height":887,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/11\/Himachal-HC_1.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Bhumika Indulia","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Bhumika Indulia","Est. reading time":"3 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/09\/30\/hp-hc-scope-of-interference-by-high-court-in-second-appeal-under-s-100-of-cpc-is-only-if-a-substantial-question-of-law-involved-in-appeal-appeal-dismissed-as-no-perversity-in-earlier-orders\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/09\/30\/hp-hc-scope-of-interference-by-high-court-in-second-appeal-under-s-100-of-cpc-is-only-if-a-substantial-question-of-law-involved-in-appeal-appeal-dismissed-as-no-perversity-in-earlier-orders\/","name":"HP HC | Scope of interference by High Court in Second Appeal under S. 100 of CPC is only if a substantial question of law involved; Appeal dismissed as no perversity in earlier orders | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/09\/30\/hp-hc-scope-of-interference-by-high-court-in-second-appeal-under-s-100-of-cpc-is-only-if-a-substantial-question-of-law-involved-in-appeal-appeal-dismissed-as-no-perversity-in-earlier-orders\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/09\/30\/hp-hc-scope-of-interference-by-high-court-in-second-appeal-under-s-100-of-cpc-is-only-if-a-substantial-question-of-law-involved-in-appeal-appeal-dismissed-as-no-perversity-in-earlier-orders\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/11\/Himachal-HC_1.jpg","datePublished":"2019-09-30T05:30:17+00:00","dateModified":"2019-10-04T07:21:02+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/09\/30\/hp-hc-scope-of-interference-by-high-court-in-second-appeal-under-s-100-of-cpc-is-only-if-a-substantial-question-of-law-involved-in-appeal-appeal-dismissed-as-no-perversity-in-earlier-orders\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/09\/30\/hp-hc-scope-of-interference-by-high-court-in-second-appeal-under-s-100-of-cpc-is-only-if-a-substantial-question-of-law-involved-in-appeal-appeal-dismissed-as-no-perversity-in-earlier-orders\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/09\/30\/hp-hc-scope-of-interference-by-high-court-in-second-appeal-under-s-100-of-cpc-is-only-if-a-substantial-question-of-law-involved-in-appeal-appeal-dismissed-as-no-perversity-in-earlier-orders\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/11\/Himachal-HC_1.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/11\/Himachal-HC_1.jpg","width":1330,"height":887},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/09\/30\/hp-hc-scope-of-interference-by-high-court-in-second-appeal-under-s-100-of-cpc-is-only-if-a-substantial-question-of-law-involved-in-appeal-appeal-dismissed-as-no-perversity-in-earlier-orders\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"HP HC | Scope of interference by High Court in Second Appeal under S. 100 of CPC is only if a substantial question of law involved; Appeal dismissed as no perversity in earlier orders"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a","name":"Bhumika Indulia","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg","caption":"Bhumika Indulia"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_1\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/11\/Himachal-HC_1.jpg","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":255954,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/10\/22\/second-appeal-is-maintainable-if-only-the-case-involves-a-substantial-question-of-law\/","url_meta":{"origin":220346,"position":0},"title":"Sikk HC | Second appeal is maintainable if only the case involves a substantial question of law; Court dismisses appeal","author":"Editor","date":"October 22, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"Sikkim High Court: Bhaskar Raj Pradhan, J., dismissed the second appeal explaining that the second appeal is maintainable before the High Court if the High Court is satisfied that the case involves a substantial question of law. Supreme Court in Union of India v. Ibrahim Uddin, (2012) 8 SCC 148,\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":213843,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/04\/22\/mp-hc-appeal-in-tenancy-matter-dismissed-in-absence-of-substantial-question-of-law\/","url_meta":{"origin":220346,"position":1},"title":"MP HC | Appeal in tenancy matter dismissed in absence\u00a0 of substantial question of law","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"April 22, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"Madhya Pradesh High Court: This second appeal was filed before the Bench of Vivek Rusia, J., by appellant against the judgment and decree passed by 11th Additional District Judge, Indore whereby appeal was partly allowed while affirming the judgment and decree passed under Section 12 (1)(a) of M.P. Accommodation Control\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":253689,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/09\/04\/section-100-cpc\/","url_meta":{"origin":220346,"position":2},"title":"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","author":"Editor","date":"September 4, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"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 High Court passed in a second appeal whereby it had reversed the order of the first appellate court granting injunction in favour of the appellant\u2212plaintiff in a property\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/07\/MicrosoftTeams-image-13.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/07\/MicrosoftTeams-image-13.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/07\/MicrosoftTeams-image-13.png?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/07\/MicrosoftTeams-image-13.png?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/07\/MicrosoftTeams-image-13.png?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":271912,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/08\/19\/it-is-not-for-the-court-to-decide-the-validity-of-the-allotment-of-land-by-the-government-tripura-high-court-dismisses-appeal-in-suit-for-recovery-of-possession-of-land\/","url_meta":{"origin":220346,"position":3},"title":"“It is not for the court to decide the validity of the allotment of land by the Government”; Tripura High Court dismisses appeal in suit for recovery of possession of land","author":"Editor","date":"August 19, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"Tripura High Court: T. Amarnath Goud, J. dismissed a second appeal which was filed under section 100 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 against the judgment which dismissed the appeal affirming the judgment passed by Civil Judge ( Senior Division) in connection with declaring the right, title & interest of\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Tripura High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/08\/tripura-high-court.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/08\/tripura-high-court.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/08\/tripura-high-court.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/08\/tripura-high-court.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/08\/tripura-high-court.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":248703,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/05\/25\/administration-of-justice\/","url_meta":{"origin":220346,"position":4},"title":"Madras HC | “Not fair to expect judges to expend too much time, energy in proof-reading”: HC stresses counsels should reflect ‘distilled understanding’ while preparing drafts","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"May 25, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"Madras High Court: G.R. Swaminathan, J., emphasised that all stakeholders in the process of administration of justice should discharge their commitments sincerely. The High Court was set to dispose of a second appeal filed before it in a suit for malicious prosecution. The defendants in the suit had earlier filed\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":216154,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/06\/27\/ph-hc-presence-of-a-substantial-question-of-law-not-a-sine-qua-non-for-deciding-a-regular-second-appeal\/","url_meta":{"origin":220346,"position":5},"title":"P&H HC | Presence of a substantial question of law, not a sine qua non for deciding a regular second appeal","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"June 27, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"Punjab and Haryana High Court: Sudip Ahluwalia, J. disposed of the matter directing the parties that a disputed land cannot be used by either of them and also stated that a regular second appeal can be accepted without a substantial question of law. In the present case, a suit was\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/220346","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/8808"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=220346"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/220346\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/222107"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=220346"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=220346"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=220346"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}