Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 4 of 4 (0.19 seconds)

Manicka Poosali (Dead) By Lrs. & Others vs Anjalai Ammal & Another on 17 March, 2005

8. The general rule regarding an appeal under Section 100 of CPC is that the jurisdiction of the High Court is limited to the substantial question of law framed at the time of the admission of appeal or at a subsequent later stage, if the High Court is satisfied that such a question of law arises from the facts found by the Courts below. The same has been noted by this Court in Manicka Poosali & Ors. v. Anjalai Ammal & Anr.[1].
Supreme Court of India Cites 7 - Cited by 35 - Full Document

Kannan (Dead) By Lrs And Others vs V.S. Pandurangam (Dead) By Lrs & Others on 27 November, 2007

10. In the present case it is true that the substantial question of law was formulated by the High Court, though not at the admission stage but at a later stage before the hearing, it does not follow that merely because the “substantial question of law” was formulated by the High Court at a later stage, the judgment of the High Court becomes a nullity, liable to be set aside by this Court on that ground alone and for the same the appellants before us must also show prejudice to them on this account. This Court in the case Kannan & Ors. v. V.S. Pandurangam[2] even went on to hold as under:
Supreme Court of India Cites 6 - Cited by 21 - Full Document
1