Registrar Has No Power To Cancel Registered Sale Deeds: Madras High Court Reaffirms Civil Court’s Exclusive Jurisdiction MP High Court Refuses to Quash FIR Against Principal of Sacred Heart Convent High School in Forced Conversion Case Employees Of Registered Societies Cannot Claim Article 311 Protection: Delhi High Court Clarifies Limits Of Constitutional Safeguards In Private Employment Maintenance Cannot Be Doubled Without Cogent Reasons, Wife's Education And Earning Capacity Relevant Factors: Gujarat High Court A Foreign Award Must First Be "Recognised" Before It Becomes A Decree: Bombay High Court A Registered Will Does Not Become Genuine Merely Because It Is Registered: Andhra Pradesh High Court Rejects Suspicious Testament Compensation Under Railways Act Requires Proof of Bona Fide Passenger – Mere GRP Entry and Medical Records Cannot Establish ‘Untoward Incident’: Delhi High Court Tenancy Rights Cannot Be Bequeathed By Will: Himachal Pradesh High Court Declares Mutation Based On Tenant’s Will Void Preventive Detention Cannot Be Based On Mere Apprehension of Bail: Delhi High Court Quashes PITNDPS Detention Order Probate Court Alone Has Exclusive Jurisdiction To Decide Validity Of Will – Probate Petition Cannot Be Rejected Merely Because A Civil Suit Is Pending: Allahabad High Court PwD Candidates Cannot Be Denied Appointment After Selection; Authorities Must Accommodate Them In Suitable Posts: Supreme Court Directs SSC And CAG To Appoint Candidates With Disabilities When Registered Partition Deed Exists, Plea Of Prior Oral Partition Cannot Override It:  Madras High Court Dismisses Second Appeal Municipal Bodies Cannot Demand Character Verification Of Residents: Calcutta High Court Strikes Down Surveillance Condition In Building Sanction State Cannot Exploit Contractual Workers For Perennial Work: Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants Pay Parity To PUNBUS Drivers And Conductors Police Inputs Cannot Create New Building Laws: Calcutta High Court Strikes Down Security-Based Conditions Near Nabanna 'Raising A Child As Daughter Does Not Make Her An Adopted Child': Punjab & Haryana High Court Once Leave Under Section 80(2) CPC Is Granted, Prior Notice to Government Is Not Mandatory: Orissa High Court Restores Trial Court Decree State Cannot Use Article 226 To Evade Compliance With Court Orders: Gauhati High Court Dismisses Union’s Petition With Costs ED Officers Accused Of Assault By ₹23-Crore Scam Accused – FIR Survives But Probe Shifted To CBI: Jharkhand High Court High Courts Should Not Interfere In Academic Integrity Proceedings At Preliminary Stage: Kerala High Court Power Of Attorney Holder With Personal Knowledge Can Depose In Cheque Bounce Cases: Kerala High Court Sets Aside Acquittal Agreement Cannot Dissolve Hindu Marriage, But Can Prove Mutual Separation”: J&K & Ladakh High Court Denies Maintenance

“A Second Appeal Only Lies on a Substantial Question of Law” – Delhi HC

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


New Delhi: In a significant ruling on November 21, 2023, the Delhi High Court, presided over by Hon’ble Ms. Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora, upheld the eviction of the appellant, Rajender Bhardwaj, from a disputed property. The court’s decision, in this case, reinforced the legal principle that a second appeal is contingent upon the presence of a substantial question of law.

The case, titled RSA NO. 216 OF 2023, involved an appeal against the judgments of the Additional District Judge and the Senior Civil Judge. These judgments had previously decreed the eviction of Bhardwaj and the recovery of arrears and user charges.

Justice Arora, in her verdict, emphasized the limited scope of second appeals in the civil judicial system, quoting the Supreme Court’s precedent in Nazir Mohamed v. J. Kamal and others (2020) 19 SCC 57, “A second appeal, or for that matter, any appeal is not a matter of right... A second appeal only lies on a substantial question of law.”

The case delved into the question of whether the appellant’s arguments presented any significant legal queries. The court found that the appellant’s contentions were primarily factual and did not raise substantial legal questions that warranted a second appeal. This aligns with the CPC’s restrictions on the right of second appeals to cases where a significant question of law is involved.

Moreover, the court acknowledged the appellant’s undertaking to vacate the disputed property by January 21, 2024, and granted an extension for this purpose. The appellant agreed to pay increased user charges in the event of non-compliance with the court’s orders.

Delhi High Court’s judgment underscores the importance of legal principles governing second appeals in civil litigation. The decision serves as a reminder that the scope of second appeals is not to re-agitate facts but to address substantial legal questions, ensuring the efficient and judicious use of judicial resources.

Date of Decision: 21st November 2023

RAJENDER BHARDWAJ VS SULOCHANA

Latest Legal News