Niyam v2 is live — start for just ₹100 — 200 credits to try

december 2006

Supreme Court of India · 2006-12-05

Shah Mansukhlal Chhaganial(D) Through ... vs Gohil Amarsing Govindbhai(D) Through ...

Citation / case number
AIRONLINE 2006 SC 265
Court
Supreme Court of India
Petitioner
Shah Mansukhlal Chhaganial(D) Through ...
Respondent
Gohil Amarsing Govindbhai(D) Through ...
Author
Arijit Pasayat
Bench
Arijit Pasayat, S.H. Kapadia

Judgment text excerpt

The Supreme Court held that the Gujarat High Court's judgment allowing a Second Appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, was unsustainable as it failed to formulate any substantial question of law, which is a prerequisite for such appeals. The Court reiterated that the High Court's jurisdiction under Section 100 is limited to cases involving substantial questions of law and cannot interfere with pure questions of fact. Consequently, the Supreme Court set aside the High Court's decision, emphasizing the necessity of adhering to procedural requirements outlined in Section 100 CPC.

Shah Mansukhlal Chhaganial(D) Through ... vs Gohil Amarsing Govindbhai(D) Through ... · Niyam