Second appeal
Full Text
(1) Save as otherwise expressly provided in the body of this Code or by any other law for the time being in force, an appeal shall lie to the High Court from every decree passed in appeal by any Court subordinate to the High Court, if the High Court is satisfied that the case involves a substantial question of law.
(2) An appeal may lie under this section from an appellate decree passed ex parte.
(3) In an appeal under this section, the memorandum of appeal shall precisely state the substantial question of law involved in the appeal.
(4) Where the High Court is satisfied that a substantial question of law is involved in any case, it shall formulate that question.
(5) The appeal shall be heard on the question so formulated and the respondent shall, at the hearing of the appeal, be allowed to argue that the case does not involve such question:
Provided that nothing in this sub-section shall be 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.
Plain English Summary
Section 100 governs Second Appeals to the High Court from appellate civil decrees, restricting jurisdiction exclusively to cases involving a substantial question of law which must be precisely stated in the memorandum, judicially formulated by the High Court, and argued accordingly.
Key Legal Elements
- Strict Substantial Question of Law Requirement: Jurisdiction of the High Court in second appeal is confined strictly to substantial questions of law (post-1976 amendment).
- Precise Statement in Memorandum (Sec 100(3)): The appellant must explicitly draft and articulate the proposed substantial question of law in the appeal grounds.
- Mandatory Judicial Formulation (Sec 100(4)): The High Court must frame and formulate the substantial question at the admission stage.
- Hearing Confined to Formulated Question: Hearing proceeds on the formulated question, subject to the court's power (proviso) to formulate additional questions on recorded reasons.
- Respondent's Defense (Sec 100(5)): Right of the respondent to plead and argue that the case does not involve the formulated substantial question of law.
Practical Note
Substantial Question of Law Jurisprudence & High Court Practice: (1) Mandatory Formulation (Sec 100(4)): In *Santosh Hazari v. Purushottam Tiwari (2001)* and *Nazir Mohamed v. J. Kamala (2020)*, the Supreme Court ruled that formulating a substantial question of law is a condition precedent for exercising jurisdiction; deciding a second appeal without formulating such a question is fatal and renders the judgment void. (2) Test of 'Substantial Question of Law' (*Chunilal V. Mehta v. Century Spg. & Mfg. Co., 1962* & *Hero Vinoth v. Seshammal, 2006*): A question of law is substantial if it is of public importance, directly affects the rights of parties, is not settled by precedent, or involves a debatable alternative interpretation. A question already authoritatively settled by the Supreme Court is not a substantial question of law. (3) Prohibition on Interfering with Concurrent Findings of Fact: A second appeal is not a third trial; concurrent findings of fact by trial and first appellate courts cannot be disturbed unless perverse, based on no evidence, or arrived at by ignoring vital admissible documentary evidence. (4) Respondent's Right (Sec 100(5)): The respondent possesses a statutory right to demonstrate at the final hearing that the question formulated does not arise or is not a substantial question of law.
हिंदी पाठ
(1) इस संहिता के मुख्य भाग में या तत्समय प्रवृत्त किसी अन्य विधि द्वारा जैसा अन्यथा अभिव्यक्त रूप से उपबंधित है उसके सिवाय, उच्च न्यायालय के अधीनस्थ किसी न्यायालय द्वारा अपील में पारित प्रत्येक डिक्री की अपील उच्च न्यायालय में होगी, यदि उच्च न्यायालय का यह समाधान हो जाता है कि उस मामले में कोई सारवान् विधि-प्रश्न (Substantial Question of Law) अंतर्वलित है।
(2) एकपक्षीय पारित अपीलीय डिक्री की भी इस धारा के अधीन अपील हो सकेगी।
(3) इस धारा के अधीन अपील में, अपील के ज्ञापन में वह सारवान् विधि-प्रश्न प्रमित रूप से (precisely) कथित किया जाएगा जो अपील में अंतर्वलित है।
(4) जहाँ उच्च न्यायालय का यह समाधान हो जाता है कि किसी मामले में कोई सारवान् विधि-प्रश्न अंतर्वलित है, वहाँ वह उस प्रश्न को विरचित (formulate) करेगा।
(5) अपील इस प्रकार विरचित प्रश्न पर ही सुनी जाएगी और प्रत्यर्थी (respondent) को अपील की सुनवाई में यह तर्क करने की अनुमति दी जाएगी कि उस मामले में ऐसा कोई प्रश्न अंतर्वलित नहीं है:
परन्तु इस उपधारा की कोई भी बात उच्च न्यायालय की इस शक्ति को छीनने वाली या सीमित करने वाली नहीं समझी जाएगी कि वह लेखबद्ध किए जाने वाले कारणों से उस अपील को ऐसे किसी अन्य सारवान् विधि-प्रश्न पर भी सुने जो उसके द्वारा विरचित नहीं किया गया था, यदि उसका यह समाधान हो जाता है कि मामले में ऐसा प्रश्न अंतर्वलित है।