U. Sudheera & Ors. v. C. Yashoda & Ors.

2 S.C.R. 92 : 2025 INSC 80 U. Sudheera & Others v. C. Yashoda & Others (Civil Appeal No. 567 of 2025) 17 January 2025 [J.B. Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan,* JJ.] Issue for Consideration Whether the High Court can pass any ad interim order for a limited period, before framing substantial question(s) of law, while dealing with a second appeal filed under Order XLI r/w Section 100 CPC. Headnotes† Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 – s.100 – Second appeal – In second appeal, High Court granted the interim relief directing the parties to maintain status quo, without formulating substantial questions of law as mandated u/s.100 – Challenge to: Held: Interim order passed by the High Court set aside – High Court cannot grant an interim order, without framing substantial question of law as required to be framed u/s.100 – It acquires jurisdiction to deal with the second appeal on merits only when it frames a substantial question of law u/s.100 – If no substantial question of law arises, the second appeal cannot be entertained and ought to be dismissed, as the jurisdiction of the High Court itself is not yet invoked. [Paras 10.2, 10.4] Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 – ss.100, 151 – Practice in some High Courts to order Notice of Motion, where even before an appeal is admitted, the respondents are granted opportunity to contest the case – High Court in exercise of its power u/s.151, if can grant interim orders: Held: No – High Court cannot grant any interim protection to the appellant, unless the substantial question of law is framed u/s.100(4) or as per the Proviso – Inherent power u/s.151 cannot be used by the High Court in violation of the express mandates in other provisions of the Code. [Para 10.3] Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 – s.100 – Second appeal – Jurisdiction of High Court – Discussed. * Author [2025] 2 S.C.R. 93 Case Law Cited Ram Phal v.

Banarasi (2003) 11 SCC 762; Raghavendra Swamy Mutt v. Uttaradi Mutt [2016] 3 SCR 11 : (2016) 11 SCC 235; Bhagyashree Anant Gaonkar v. Narendra @ Nagesh Bharma Holkar (2023) SCC Online SC 1236; Santosh Hazari v. Purushottam Tiwari [2001] 1 SCR 948 : (2001) 3 SCC 179; Roop Singh v. Ram Singh [2000] 2 SCR 605 : (2000) 3 SCC 708; State Bank of India v. S.N. Goyal [2008] 7 SCR 631 : (2008) 8 SCC 92; Municipal Committee, Hoshiarpur v. Punjab SEB [2010] 13 SCR 658 : (2010) 13 SCC 216; Umerkhan v. Bismillabi [2011] 9 SCR 551 : (2011) 9 SCC 684; Hemavathi & Others v. V. Hombegowda and Another, 2023 INSC 848 : [2023] 12 SCR 477 : 2023 SCC OnLine SC 1206 – relied on. Vareed Jacob v. Sosamma Geeverghese and Ors. [2004] 1 Supp. SCR 534 : (2004) 6 SCC 378; Vrajesh Anandrao Kerkar v. Durgesh Tulsidas Kerkar and Others, 2024 SCC OnLine Bom 472 – held inapplicable.