Vs. Bilam Kanwar (D) Thr. LRS.  INSC 1568 (11 September 2009)
APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.6203 OF 2009 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C)
No.7461 of 2009) Pushpchand ...Appellant(s) Versus Builam Kanwar (Dead) through
O R D E R
learned counsel for the parties.
the tenant's appeal for setting aside judgment dated 17th January, 2009 of the
learned Single Judge of the Rajasthan High Court who allowed the second appeal
filed by the landlord, set aside judgment and decree dated 2.2.2005 of the
lower appellate court and restored the decree of eviction passed by the trial
of the impugned judgment shows that after making a mention of the judgments and
decrees passed by the courts below, the High Court proceeded to observe:
following substantial questions of law arises for consideration by this Court:
the first appellate court could reverse the findings of facts recorded by the
learned trial Court on issue No.1(a) and 1(b) simply because the learned first
appellate court did not agree with the findings recorded by the learned trial
Court and no error much less any jurisdictional error has been committed by the
learned trial court."
borne out from the record that at the time of issuance of notice in the second
appeal, the High Court did not frame any substantial question of law. Even
before commencement of hearing of the second appeal, the High Court is not
shown to have formulated any substantial question of law.
settled law that when a second appeal is placed before the High Court for
consideration, it has to consider whether any substantial question of law
arises therein. In case the High Court feels satisfied that the case involves a
substantial question of law, then it is required to formulate such question.
The appeal is then required to be heard on the question so formulated. The
respondent can, at the hearing of the appeal, argue that the case does not
involve any substantial question of law including the one framed by the High
Court. Of course, it is open to the High Court, for reasons to be recorded, to
formulate any other substantial question of law.
impugned judgment was passed by the High Court without formulating any
substantial question of law arising in the case, the same is liable to be set
the appeal is allowed, the impugned judgment is set aside and the matter is
remitted to the High Court, which shall now consider whether any substantial
question of law arises in the appeal. If the High Court comes to the conclusion
that such question arises, then it shall formulate the same and, thereafter,
decide the appeal after giving opportunity of hearing to the parties.
suit for eviction was filed in the year 1991, the High Court is requested to
dispose of the appeal within a period of six months from the date of receipt /
production of copy of this order.
parties are represented before this Court.
the High Court is not required to issue fresh notice to any of them. It will be
open to the parties to inform their respective advocates before the High Court
and arrange for their appearance on the date which may be fixed by the High
......................J. [B.N. AGRAWAL]
......................J. [G.S. SINGHVI]
September 11, 2009.