First and Second Appeals under CPC: Step-by-Step Legal Guide to Civil Appeals in India

Introduction

The appellate system in India represents a cornerstone of the judicial framework, ensuring that justice is not only done but seen to be done. An appeal constitutes a fundamental legal remedy available to aggrieved parties seeking redress against what they perceive as unjust decrees or orders by presenting their grievances to a superior court. The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as “CPC”) provides comprehensive provisions governing the appellate process, establishing a structured hierarchy that allows for systematic review of judicial decisions through First and Second Appeals.

Civil Appeals in India: A Comprehensive Analysis of First and Second Appeals under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908

During an appeal, a higher court reviews the decision made by a lower court, considering both legal and factual aspects

The concept of appeal, while not explicitly defined within the CPC, finds its interpretation in Black’s Law Dictionary as “the complaint to a superior court of an injustice done or error committed by an inferior one, whose judgment or decision the court above is called upon to correct or reverse” [1]. This definition encapsulates the essence of appellate jurisdiction – the transfer of a cause from a court of inferior jurisdiction to one of superior jurisdiction for the purpose of obtaining a review and retrial.

The Indian appellate system operates on the principle that no individual should be deprived of the opportunity to challenge a decision that adversely affects their rights and interests. This principle is operationalized through the provisions outlined in Sections 96 to 99A, 107 to 108, and Order 41 of the CPC, which govern appeals from original decrees, commonly referred to as first appeals. Second appeals are comprehensively dealt with in Sections 100 to 103 and Order 42 of the Code.

Legal Framework and Statutory Provisions

Constitutional Foundation

The Indian Constitution, through Article 136, empowers the Supreme Court with special leave jurisdiction, while Articles 226 and 227 confer writ jurisdiction upon High Courts. However, the statutory right to appeal, as distinct from constitutional remedies, derives its authority from the CPC and other specific legislation.

Statutory Nature of Appeals

Appeals are recognized as statutory and substantive rights rather than inherent rights [2]. The statutory nature implies that the right to appeal must be specifically conferred by a statute, complete with the operative appellate machinery. This distinguishes the right to appeal from the inherent right to institute a suit. The substantive nature of this right means that it grants parties the fundamental entitlement to seek review of decisions by higher courts.

As established in various judicial pronouncements, the right to appeal is not merely procedural but constitutes a valuable right that can be waived through agreement. However, if a party accepts benefits under a decree, they may be estopped from challenging its legality subsequently.

First Appeals: Statutory Framework and Procedure

Section 96: Foundation of First Appeals

Section 96 of the CPC establishes the fundamental right to appeal, stating that “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 from every decree passed by any Court exercising original jurisdiction to the Court authorized to hear appeals from the decisions of such Court” [3].

This provision creates a presumptive right to appeal from all original decrees, subject to specific exceptions. The section recognizes that every person aggrieved by a decree should have at least one opportunity to seek redress from a higher judicial authority.

Procedural Requirements under Order 41

Order 41 of the CPC establishes detailed procedural requirements that govern the conduct of first appeals. These requirements are designed to ensure that appeals are presented in a manner that facilitates effective judicial review while maintaining procedural efficiency.

Memorandum of Appeal

The initiation of an appeal requires the submission of a memorandum of appeal to the competent officer of the court, as mandated by Order 41, Rule 1. This document serves as the foundational pleading that sets forth the appellant’s grievances and the relief sought. The memorandum must be accompanied by a copy of the decree or order being appealed against.

When an advocate signs the memorandum on behalf of the appellant, it becomes mandatory to include a Vakalatnama – a formal document authorizing the advocate to act on behalf of the appellant. This requirement ensures that the court has proper documentation of legal representation.

Grounds of Objection

The memorandum of appeal must succinctly state objections to the decree under different numbered headings, without providing detailed particulars or arguments at this stage. This requirement, as specified in Order 41, Rule 2, serves the crucial function of defining the scope of the appeal. Significantly, the court will only consider and hear grounds that are explicitly mentioned in the memorandum. While the court retains discretion to consider unstated grounds, no decision will be made on such grounds until the affected party has been given an opportunity to be heard.

Court’s Power to Reject or Return

Order 41, Rule 3 empowers the court to reject a memorandum of appeal that does not conform to the specified format or return it to the appellant for necessary amendments. This provision ensures that appeals meet minimum standards of clarity and compliance before being admitted for hearing.

Registration and Stay Orders

Upon acceptance of the memorandum of appeal, the court records the date of submission and registers it in the appeal register, as per Order 41, Rule 9. The appellate court may issue stay orders to halt proceedings in the subordinate court, though such orders are granted only when the court determines that the appellant would suffer irreparable harm without such protection. The landmark case of Maya Devi v. M/s Dharampal Madanlal [4] clarified that the power to stay proceedings lies exclusively with the appellate court and not with the execution court.

Hearing and Judgment

The appellate process culminates in a hearing where both parties are afforded a fair opportunity to present their cases. Order 41, Rule 30 mandates that the court must pronounce its decision in open court immediately after the conclusion of the hearing. Any significant delay in announcing the decision may be considered a denial of justice, as illustrated in Bhagwandas Fatechand Daswani v. HPA International [5], where a five-year delay between hearing and judgment was deemed unjust.

Additional Evidence

Order 41, Rule 27 grants the appellate court discretion to admit additional evidence if it is material to the appeal’s merits and was not available during the trial. This provision recognizes that new evidence may emerge that could materially affect the outcome of the case.

Consequences of Non-Appearance

If an appellant fails to appear on the scheduled hearing date, the appeal may be dismissed under Order 41, Rule 17. However, if sufficient reasons are provided for the absence, the court may issue an ex-parte order under Order 41, Rule 21, or order the appeal to be re-listed for hearing under Order 41, Rule 19.

Second Appeals: Limited Jurisdiction and Substantial Questions of Law

Section 100: Scope and Limitations

Section 100 establishes the framework for second appeals, providing that “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” [6]. However, this right is subject to a crucial limitation – the High Court’s jurisdiction is restricted to addressing substantial questions of law.

The restriction to substantial questions of law represents a significant departure from the broader scope of first appeals, which can address both questions of law and fact. This limitation serves the policy objective of ensuring that higher courts focus their resources on legally significant matters rather than routine fact-finding exercises.

Criteria for Substantial Questions of Law

The Supreme Court in Sir Chunilal Mehta and Sons v. The Century Spinning and Manufacturing Co., Ltd. [7] established the test for determining whether a question of law qualifies as substantial. The court held that the determination of whether a raised question of law is of general public importance or significantly affects the parties’ rights is the appropriate criterion.

In Govind Raju v. Mariyamman [8], the Supreme Court further refined the characteristics of a debatable question of law that meets the requirements for consideration in a second appeal:

The question should be open to argument and discussion
The question should not have been previously decided by applicable law
The question should significantly impact the substantive rights of the parties involved

Grounds for Second Appeals

Second appeals may be initiated under specific circumstances:

Substantial Question of Law

The primary ground for second appeal is the involvement of a substantial question of law that meets the criteria established by judicial precedent.

Ex-parte Decrees in First Appeal

A second appeal may be initiated when an ex-parte decree has been passed in the first appeal, as clarified in Monika Pusali v. Anjali Amma [9]. This provision ensures that parties are not denied their right to contest matters merely due to procedural defaults in the first appellate stage.

Section 102: Limitations on Second Appeals

Section 102 imposes important limitations on the right to file second appeals, stating: “No second appeal shall lie in any suit of the nature cognizable by Courts of Small Causes when the amount or value of the subject-matter of the original suit does not exceed three thousand rupees” [10].

This limitation serves multiple policy objectives:

Judicial Efficiency: By limiting second appeals in lower-value cases, the provision ensures that higher courts can focus their attention on matters of greater significance and complexity.
Cost-Benefit Analysis: The provision recognizes that the costs and time involved in second appeals may be disproportionate to the value at stake in smaller cases.
Access to Justice: While limiting higher-level appeals, the provision ensures that litigants still have access to first-level appellate review.

Section 103: Power to Determine Issues of Fact

Section 103 provides a limited exception to the general rule that second appeals are restricted to questions of law. It states: “In any second appeal, the High Court may, if the evidence on the record is sufficient, determine any issue necessary for the disposal of the appeal” [11].

This power can be exercised in two specific situations:

When a necessary issue has not been determined by the lower appellate court or both the court of first instance and the lower appellate court
When a necessary issue has been wrongly determined by such courts by reason of a decision on a question of law referred to in Section 100

The case of Jadu Gopal Chakravarty v. Pannalal Bhowmick & Ors [12] illustrates the application of Section 103, where the court examined whether a compromise decree was obtained by fraud, despite it being purely a question of fact, because neither lower court had addressed this crucial issue.

Judicial Interpretation and Case Law

Maya Devi v. M/s Dharampal Madanlal (1989)

This landmark judgment clarified the jurisdiction regarding stay orders in appeals. The Supreme Court held that the power to stay proceedings lies exclusively with the appellate court and not with the execution court. This decision prevents forum shopping and ensures that stay applications are decided by courts with proper appellate jurisdiction over the matter.

Bhagwandas Fatechand Daswani v. HPA International (2000)

This case established an important principle regarding the timing of judgments in appeals. The Supreme Court observed that a delay of five years between the conclusion of hearing and the delivery of judgment constitutes a denial of justice. The case emphasizes the constitutional requirement that justice should not only be done but should be seen to be done expeditiously.

Sir Chunilal Mehta and Sons v. The Century Spinning and Manufacturing Co., Ltd.

This decision established the foundational test for determining substantial questions of law in second appeals. The court’s emphasis on general public importance and significant impact on parties’ rights has become the standard criterion applied by courts across India.

Kalidas v. Ram Singh (1973)

This judgment definitively established that second appeals cannot be filed solely based on findings of fact, regardless of how erroneous those findings might appear. This limitation ensures that second appeals maintain their focus on legal interpretation rather than fact-finding.

Regulatory Framework and Compliance

Court Fees and Financial Implications

The filing of appeals involves payment of prescribed court fees under the Court Fees Act, 1870. The fee structure is designed to ensure access to justice while preventing frivolous appeals. Appeals in cases involving higher monetary values require proportionally higher fees, reflecting the principle that those with greater financial stakes should bear correspondingly greater costs for accessing appellate remedies.

Time Limitations

The Limitation Act, 1963, prescribes specific time periods within which appeals must be filed. For first appeals, the general limitation period is 90 days from the date of the decree, while second appeals must typically be filed within 90 days of the first appellate decree. These limitations serve the important function of ensuring legal certainty and preventing indefinite litigation.

Legal Representation

While parties have the right to represent themselves in appellate proceedings, the complexity of appellate law and procedure often necessitates professional legal representation. The Bar Council of India Rules and various High Court Rules govern the conduct of advocates in appellate proceedings, ensuring that professional standards are maintained.

Contemporary Challenges and Reform Initiatives

Pendency and Delay

The Indian judicial system faces significant challenges related to pendency and delay in appellate proceedings. According to data from the Department of Justice, substantial backlogs exist at all levels of the appellate hierarchy. Various initiatives, including case management systems and alternative dispute resolution mechanisms, are being implemented to address these challenges.

Technology Integration

The integration of technology in appellate proceedings has accelerated, particularly following the COVID-19 pandemic. E-filing systems, virtual hearings, and digital case management systems are transforming the traditional appellate process, making it more accessible and efficient.

Judicial Infrastructure

The expansion of judicial infrastructure, including the establishment of additional appellate courts and recruitment of judicial officers, remains a priority for improving the appellate system’s effectiveness.

Rights and Obligations of Parties

Rights of Appellants

Appellants in civil proceedings enjoy several fundamental rights:

Right to Legal Representation: Parties have the right to be represented by qualified advocates in appellate proceedings.
Right to Fair Hearing: Courts must provide adequate opportunity for parties to present their cases and respond to opposing arguments.
Right to Reasoned Orders: Appellate courts must provide reasoned decisions that address the substantial points raised by the parties.
Right to Further Appeal: Subject to statutory limitations, parties retain the right to pursue higher levels of appeal where grounds exist.

Obligations and Responsibilities

Parties to appellate proceedings also bear important obligations:

Truthfulness and Good Faith: Parties must present their cases truthfully and in good faith, without attempting to mislead the court.
Compliance with Procedures: Strict adherence to procedural requirements is essential for the effective conduct of appeals.
Payment of Costs: Parties may be liable for costs in accordance with court orders and statutory provisions.
Respect for Court Orders: All interim and final orders of appellate courts must be complied with promptly.

Impact of Technology and Digital Transformation

E-Courts Initiative

The Government of India’s e-Courts project has significantly impacted appellate proceedings. Online filing systems, digital case tracking, and electronic service of process have made the appellate system more accessible to litigants across the country. The Supreme Court and various High Courts have implemented comprehensive digital platforms that allow parties to file appeals, track case status, and access court orders electronically.

Virtual Hearings

The adoption of virtual hearing technologies has revolutionized appellate practice, particularly in the post-pandemic era. Courts can now conduct hearings efficiently while reducing travel costs and time for parties and advocates. This technological advancement has been particularly beneficial for appeals involving parties from distant geographical locations.

Conclusion

The appellate system under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, represents a sophisticated framework designed to balance the competing demands of access to justice, judicial efficiency, and legal certainty. The distinction between first and second appeals, with their respective scopes and limitations, reflects a nuanced understanding of the proper role of different levels of courts in the judicial hierarchy.

First appeals provide comprehensive review of both factual and legal determinations, ensuring that parties have meaningful opportunity to challenge adverse decisions. The procedural requirements established by Order 41 create a structured framework that facilitates effective appellate review while maintaining judicial efficiency.

Second appeals, with their focus on substantial questions of law, serve the important function of ensuring legal consistency and development while preventing the higher judiciary from being overwhelmed with routine factual disputes. The limitations imposed by Sections 100 and 102 reflect careful policy choices about the appropriate allocation of judicial resources.

The statutory nature of the right to appeal, as opposed to an inherent right, emphasizes the importance of procedural compliance and the rule of law. This framework ensures that appellate rights are exercised within defined parameters while protecting the fundamental principle that justice should be accessible to all.

Contemporary challenges, including case pendency, technological transformation, and changing societal expectations, continue to shape the evolution of the appellate system. However, the fundamental principles established by the CPC remain robust and continue to serve the cause of justice effectively.

The Indian appellate system, through its structured approach to first and second appeals, demonstrates the legal system’s commitment to providing meaningful remedies to aggrieved parties while maintaining judicial hierarchy and efficiency. As the system continues to evolve through technological advancement and procedural reforms, these foundational principles ensure that the pursuit of justice remains both accessible and effective.

References

[1] Black’s Law Dictionary, 11th Edition, Bryan A. Garner, West Academic Publishing (2019)

[2] State of Maharashtra v. Hindustan Construction Company Ltd., (2010) 6 SCC 436

[3] The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Section 96, Available at: https://www.indiacode.nic.in/show-data?actid=AC_CEN_3_20_00051_190805_1523340333624

[4] Maya Devi v. M/s Dharampal Madanlal, AIR 1989 SC 1247

[5] Bhagwandas Fatechand Daswani v. HPA International, (2000) 2 SCC 13, Available at: https://indiankanoon.org/doc/497316/

[6] The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Section 100

[7] Sir Chunilal Mehta and Sons v. The Century Spinning and Manufacturing Co., Ltd., AIR 1962 SC 1314

[8] Govind Raju v. Mariyamman, (2005) 3 SCC 327

[9] Monika Pusali v. Anjali Amma, (2005) 8 SCC 620

[10] The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Section 102

[11] The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Section 103

[12] Jadu Gopal Chakravarty v. Pannalal Bhowmick & Ors, AIR 1975 SC 1844

[13] Vinubhai Haribhai Malaviya and others v. State of Gujarat and another, (2019) 17 SCC 1

[14] Kalidas v. Ram Singh, (1973) 2 SCC 858

[15] HPA International v. Bhagwandas Fateh Chand Daswani, (2004) 6 SCC 537, Available at: https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1477372/

Download Full Judgments (PDF)

Appellate courtsCivil appeals Appeals in IndiaCivil litigationFirst appealsSecond appeals

By aaditya.bhatt