⚖ Part VII · Appeals — Map (§§96–112 overview) ↗

CPC, 1908 · Part VII · Appeals · Second appeals (§§100–103)

Section 103 — Power of High Court to determine issue of fact

A second appeal is about law, not facts — but § 103 opens a narrow window. In any second appeal, if the evidence on record is sufficient, the High Court may itself determine an issue of fact needed to dispose of the appeal — but only one the courts below left undetermined (a), or got wrong because of a § 100 error of law (b). It lets the Court finish the case instead of remanding it.

§ 103

How to read Section 103

A narrow fact-finding power

In a second appeal the High Court may determine an issue of fact necessary for disposal — but only if the evidence on record is sufficient. It is an enabling power, used to avoid a remand.

(a) Issue left undetermined

An issue not determined by the lower Appellate Court — or by both the Court of first instance and the lower Appellate Court.

(b) Wrongly determined via a § 100 error

An issue wrongly determined by such Court or Courts because of a decision on a question of law of the kind in § 100.

The bare Act

Section 103 · verbatim (substituted 1976)

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,—

(a) which has not been determined by the lower Appellate Court or both by the Court of first instance and the lower Appellate Court, or

(b) which has been wrongly determined by such Court or Courts by reason of a decision on such question of law as is referred to in section 100.

→ A way to avoid a remand (§ 107 / Order XLI r. 25); the “question of law” is the § 100 substantial question of law.

1. The present § 103 was substituted for the old section by Act 104 of 1976, s. 40 (w.e.f. 1-2-1977) — tying the High Court’s fact-finding power in second appeals to the new “substantial question of law” scheme of § 100.

Key terms decoded

Issue of fact

A disputed question of fact — normally settled by the courts below and not re-opened in a second appeal. § 103 is the narrow exception.

Evidence on the record is sufficient

The material already on file is enough to decide the issue — so the High Court need not send the case back for more evidence.

Necessary for the disposal of the appeal

The issue must actually matter to the result — the power is to finish the appeal, not to roam over the facts.

Lower Appellate Court

The court that decided the first appeal (§ 96) — whose appellate decree is under second appeal.

Court of first instance

The trial court that heard the original suit.

Wrongly determined by reason of a question of law (§ 100)

The fact-finding below was vitiated by a legal error — a wrong decision on a substantial question of law of the § 100 kind — so the High Court may re-decide the issue itself.

Remand (avoided)

Sending the case back to a lower court. § 103 lets the High Court decide the fact-issue on the existing record instead of remanding — saving time.

The picture — the narrow fact-window

§ 103 is a window, not a door: it lets the High Court settle a necessary issue of fact on the existing record — only where the courts below left it open (a), or decided it wrongly through a § 100 error of law (b) — sparing the parties a remand.

Section 103, part by part

The setting

In any second appeal, the High Court may,

The power exists in any second appeal — and it is a may, a discretion, not a duty.

The pre-condition

if the evidence on the record is sufficient,

The gate: the power opens only if the material already on record is enough to decide the issue — no fresh evidence is taken.

The power

determine any issue necessary for the disposal of the appeal,—

The High Court may itself decide an issue of fact — but only one that is necessary to dispose of the appeal.

(a) Left undetermined

which has not been determined by the lower Appellate Court or both by the Court of first instance and the lower Appellate Court, or

First trigger: the issue was never decided — either by the lower Appellate Court, or by both the trial court and the lower Appellate Court.

(b) Wrongly determined via §100

which has been wrongly determined by such Court or Courts by reason of a decision on such question of law as is referred to in section 100.

Second trigger: the issue was decided, but wrongly — because of an error on a § 100 substantial question of law. Correct the law, and the High Court may re-settle the fact.

Connected provisions

Section 103 closes the second-appeal cross-heading (§§ 100–103). It is the relief valve on § 100’s “law only” rule — letting the High Court decide a fact on a sufficient record (instead of a remand under § 107 / Order XLI r. 25), tied to the § 100 question of law.

§ 104 →Appeals from orders — the closed list of appealable orders. (Next section.)

§ 102 ←No second appeal in small money-recovery suits. (Previous section.)

§ 100 →The second appeal — substantial question of law. § 103’s clause (b) points back to it.

§ 107 →Appellate court’s powers — including remand, which § 103 helps avoid.

§ 96 →First appeal — the full re-hearing on facts and law that precedes a second appeal.

⚖ Part VII MapPart VII — Appeals §§ 96–112.

Test yourself

1 In a second appeal, an issue of fact necessary to decide it was never determined by the courts below, and the record is sufficient. May the High Court decide it? — Yes — § 103(a): on a sufficient record, the High Court may itself determine an undetermined necessary issue of fact.

2 The record is not sufficient to decide the issue. Can the High Court still determine it under § 103? — No — the power applies only “if the evidence on the record is sufficient”; otherwise a remand is needed.

3 The fact was decided below, but wrongly, because of an error on a substantial question of law. Relief under § 103? — Yes — § 103(b): where a fact was wrongly determined by reason of a § 100 error of law, the High Court may re-determine it.

Part VII · Appeals · Section 103 — Power of High Court to determine issue of fact.