Smt. Runia vs Swaroop Singh
2022 Latest Caselaw 10022 MP

                                   1
            IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                         AT GWALIOR
                             SA No. 2001 of 2018
                     (SMT. RUNIA Vs SWAROOP SINGH AND OTHERS)

Dated : 20-07-2022
      Shri Arun Dudawat- Advocate for the appellant.

      This Second Appeal is preferred under Section 100 of the Code of Civil
Procedure against the judgment and decree dated 05/07/2018 passed by
Additional District Judge, Pichhor, District Shivpuri (M.P.) in Civil Appeal
No.29-A/2014, whereby the judgment and decree dated 29.10.2014 passed by
First Civil Judge, Class-II, Pichhor District Shivpuri in Civil Suit No.03-A/2014

has been reversed.
      Section 100 CPC reads as under:-

            "100. Second Appe a l. - (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."

It is observed by the Apex Court in the case of Ratanlal Bansilal Vs. Kishorilal Goenka:[AIR 1003 Cal 144] that on erroneous application of law, second appeal is maintainable if it raises a substantial question.

On perusal of record, the Court has satisfied that the substantial question of law is involved in the case and, therefore, this appeal is admitted for final hearing on the following substantial question of law:

"(i) Whether the judgment and decree passed by Courts below

is perverse and contrary to law ?

(ii) Whether the Courts below have erred while non considering the amended provisions of Madhya Pradesh Land Revenue Code in the light of Hindu Succession Act, 1961?"

Let notice be issued to the respondents by registered as well as ordinary modes on payment of process fee within seven working days, returnable within one month.

List this case for final hearing in due course. Certified copy as per rules.

(RAJEEV KUMAR SHRIVASTAVA) JUDGE

Monika MONIKA SHARMA 2022.07.21 10:04:22 +05'30'