AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Leave granted.
Appellant is one of the four children of the deceased Jackie Mingal D''Souza and is the only daughter. Other three are the sons. Respondent-plaintiff is the son of one of those three sons. It was the case of the plaintiff that the property was settled in favour of the children of J. D''Souza on 13-5-1969 and thereafter release deed had been executed in favour of Charles Paul D''Souza by the remaining co-owners of the property. Defendant (the appellant) disputed the genuineness of the release claimed, but that was found in her favour by the trial Court and the first appellate Court. It is now disrupted by the High Court in the Second Appeal.
2A. The complaint of the learned counsel for the appellant is that the High Court has not formulated any substantial question of law without which no jurisdiction could have been exercised by High Court. We have also noticed from the impugned judgment that no substantial question has been formulated.
We are not disposed to enter into the merits of the case, as we propose to leave it to the High Court to dispose of the Second Appeal afresh after formulating the substantial question of law, if any, found in terms of Sec. 100 of the Code Civil Procedure.
In the result, we set aside the impugned judgment of the High Court and remit the case back to the High Court for disposal of the Second Appeal in the light of the above observations and in accordance with law.
Appeal is disposed of.