Section 100. Second appeal.
In
Kshitish Chandra Purkait V. Santosh Kumar Purkait & Ors., AIR 1997 SC 2517,
the Supreme Court observed that while deciding the second appeals, mandatory statutory
requirements are seldom borne in mind and second appeals are being entertained
without conforming to the above discipline. It further placed reliance upon its
earlier judgments in Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd. V. Union of India & Anr.,
AIR 1979 SC 798, wherein the Supreme Court observed as under:- “..... It is not
every question of law that could be permitted to be raised in the second
appeal. The parameters within which a new legal plea could be permitted to be
raised, are specifically stated in Sub-section (5) of Section 100. Under the
proviso, the Court should be ‘satisfied’ that the case involves a substantial
question of law and not a mere question of law. The reason for permitting the
substantial question of law to be raised, should be recorded by the Court. It
is implicit therefrom that on compliance of the above, the opposite party
should be afforded a fair or proper opportunity to meet the same. It is not any
legal plea that would be alleged at a stage of second appeal. It should be a
substantial question of law. The reasons for permitting the plea to be raised
should also be recorded.”
Section 100. Second appeal.
No comments:
Post a Comment