In Brief
A civil suit for specific performance of a property contract saw the trial court grant relief to the plaintiff, but the district judge reversed this on appeal. The High Court dismissed the plaintiff's second appeal, reasoning it raised no substantial question of law under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The Supreme Court held that contractual interpretation is inherently a substantial question of law, and where lower courts reach conflicting conclusions, the High Court must frame proper questions of law and decide on merits—not dismiss summarily. The Court allowed the appeal and remanded for the High Court to properly frame questions and rehear the case.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.