TMI Blog2018 (5) TMI 1788X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... jurisdiction to decide the second appeal only on the six substantial questions of law framed at the time of admitting the appeal. In other words, the jurisdiction of the High Court to decide the second appeal was confined only to six questions framed and not beyond it - Second, the High Court though had the jurisdiction to frame additional question(s) by taking recourse to proviso to subsection( 5) of Section 100 of the Code but it was subject to fulfilling the three conditions, first "such questions should arise in the appeal", second, "assign the reasons for framing the additional questions" and third, "frame the questions at the time of hearing the appeal". The High Court committed an error because it framed two additional questions i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f Civil Judge, Junior Division, Ahmednagar for declaration that, (1) the suit properties described in detail in the schedule are ancestral properties of the plaintiffs (2) the plaintiffs are the owners of the suit properties, and (3) the suit property described in schedule 1(A) is not a Trust property and be declared as the plaintiffs private property. 5. Defendant No. 1 filed its written statement whereas defendant Nos. 3 and 4 filed their joint written statement. The defendants raised several objections about maintainability of the suit. They also denied plaintiffs claim on merits. 6. The Trial Court framed issues. Parties adduced evidence in support of their case. By judgment and decree dated 10.12.1999, the Trial Judge though an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... onsequence, set aside the order passed by the District Judge in R.C.A. No.21 of 2000 and confirmed the judgment passed by the Civil Judge in R.C.S. No.600 of 1982 which has given rise to filing of the present appeal by way of special leave by the plaintiffs before this Court. 10. The short question, which arises for consideration in this appeal, is whether the High Court was justified in allowing the appeal. 11. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the record of the case, we are inclined to allow the appeal, set aside the impugned judgment and remand the case to the High Court for deciding the appeal afresh on merits in accordance with law. 12. In our considered view, the need to remand the case to the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... deemed to take away or abridge the power of the court to hear, for reasons to be recorded, the appeal on any other substantial question of law, not formulated by it, if it is satisfied that the case involves such question. 15. Subsection (1) of Section 100 says that the second appeal would be entertained by the High Court only if the High Court is satisfied that the case involves a substantial question of law . Subsection (3) makes it obligatory upon the appellant to precisely state in memo of appeal the substantial question of law involved in the appeal. Subsection (4) provides that where the High Court is satisfied that any substantial question of law is involved in the case, it shall formulate that question. In other words, onc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er, this power can be exercised by the High Court only after assigning the reasons for framing such additional question of law at the time of hearing of the appeal (See C.A. Nos.91189119 of 2010 titled Surat Singh (Dead) vs. Siri Bhagwan Ors. decided on 19.02.2018). 16. Adverting to the facts of the case at hand, we find that the High Court on 30.11.2002 admitted the second appeal and framed six substantial questions of law quoted supra as required under subsections (1) and (4) of Section 100 of the Code which, according to the High Court, arose in the second appeal. 17. The High Court was, therefore, required to decide the second appeal only on the six formulated substantial questions of law as provided under subsection (5) of Sect ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al only on the six substantial questions of law framed at the time of admitting the appeal. In other words, the jurisdiction of the High Court to decide the second appeal was confined only to six questions framed and not beyond it. 23. Second, the High Court though had the jurisdiction to frame additional question(s) by taking recourse to proviso to subsection( 5) of Section 100 of the Code but it was subject to fulfilling the three conditions, first such questions should arise in the appeal , second, assign the reasons for framing the additional questions and third, frame the questions at the time of hearing the appeal . 24. In this case, the High Court committed an error because it framed two additional questions in the judgment ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
