AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
4 paragraphs · 250 wordsLeave granted.
The appellants filed a suit claiming their mother's interest in the suit property. The trial Court decreed the suit in favour of the appellants. The first appeal filed by the respondents herein was also dismissed. In second appeal, the High Court, without framing a question of law, set aside the decisions of the lower Courts. It is the submission of the appellants that there was, in fact, no substantial question of law within the meaning of Section 100 of the Civil Procedure Code, that the High Court has erred in setting aside the decisions of the lower Courts after reappreciation of the material on record as if it were sitting in regular appeal. This submission is denied by the respondents who contended that although no question of law was formally framed, the High Court had, in fact, decided a question of law which arose out of the decisions of the lower Courts.
In view of the provisions of Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, we are of the view that the High Court should have complied with it in terms thereof and framed the substantial question of law before deciding the matter. We, accordingly, set side the decision of the High Court without expressing any view on the merits of the case. The High Court will now dispose of the second appeal in terms of Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
The appeal is allowed without any order as to costs.