https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=468883 Transposition of a respondent as appellant in a second appeal may be considered under Order 23 Rule 1A CPC and Section 107 CPC, but the court noted that limitation was not automatically attracted merely because transposition was sought. The request was refused because the proposed transposition would expand the scope of the appeal by bringing in issues personal to the respondent, including conduct-based estoppel arising from his acceptance and dealings under a later settlement deed. The ruling therefore treats transposition as discretionary and unsuitable where it would alter the character of the appeal and introduce respondent-specific controversies. en-us Fri, 22 Feb 1980 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 25 May 2026 12:05:39 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=468883 Transposition of a respondent as appellant in a second appeal may be considered under Order 23 Rule 1A CPC and Section 107 CPC, but the court noted that limitation was not automatically attracted merely because transposition was sought. The request was refused because the proposed transposition would expand the scope of the appeal by bringing in issues personal to the respondent, including conduct-based estoppel arising from his acceptance and dealings under a later settlement deed. The ruling therefore treats transposition as discretionary and unsuitable where it would alter the character of the appeal and introduce respondent-specific controversies. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 22 Feb 1980 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=468883