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

december 2006

Supreme Court of India · 2006-12-05

SHAH MANSUKHLAL CHHAGANLAL (D) THRU.LR. vs GOHIL AMARSING GOVINDBHAI(D) THRU.LRS.

Citation / case number
SC 2003/3814
Court
Supreme Court of India
Petitioner
SHAH MANSUKHLAL CHHAGANLAL (D) THRU.LR.
Respondent
GOHIL AMARSING GOVINDBHAI(D) THRU.LRS.
Author
ARIJIT PASAYAT
Bench
S.H. KAPADIA DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT

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 under Section 100 CPC, the High Court's jurisdiction 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 judgment, emphasizing the necessity of adhering to procedural requirements in appellate jurisdiction.

SHAH MANSUKHLAL CHHAGANLAL (D) THRU.LR. vs GOHIL AMARSING GOVINDBHAI(D) THRU.LRS. · Niyam