Section 98: Decision where appeal heard by two or more Judges

Code of Civil Procedure • Official Statutory Text & Practice Guide

Statutory Regulation
Legal Standard
Competent Court / Tribunal
Act 1908
Statutory Defined Terms in this Section: (Click any term for official legal definition)

Legal Commentary & Landmark Judgments: Section 98

Section 98 regulates the decision where an appeal is heard by a bench of two or more Judges, providing that the appeal shall be decided according to the opinion of the majority, and establishing reference procedures in case of equal division.

  • Majority Rule: Where an appeal is heard by a bench of two or more Judges, the appeal shall be decided in accordance with the opinion of the majority of such Judges.
  • Confirmation upon Equal Division [Sec 98(2)]: Where there is no such majority which concurs in a judgment varying or reversing the decree, the decree appealed from shall be confirmed.
  • Reference on Point of Law [Proviso]: Where the bench is equally divided on a point of law, they may state the point of law upon which they differ, and the appeal shall then be heard upon that point only by one or more of the other Judges, and decided according to the majority opinion.
  • High Court Letters Patent Saving: Section 98(3) preserves Letters Patent and High Court charter provisions regarding bench differences.
Key Landmark Precedents:
  • P.S. Sathappan v. Andhra Bank Ltd., (2004) 11 SCC 672: The Constitution Bench settled that Section 98(3) preserves the special rules of High Courts (Letters Patent), while ensuring that split decisions on law points are resolved by third judge references.
  • Tej Kaur v. Kirpal Singh, (1995) 5 SCC 119: The Supreme Court held that where two judges differ on facts and there is no majority, the decree appealed from must be confirmed under Section 98(2).
Courtroom Practice & Strategic Litigation Guidance:

If a two-judge Division Bench splits on a pure question of law, move an application under the Section 98(2) proviso requesting the Bench to formally frame the point of law for reference to a third Judge.