Skip to main content

Section 11 CPC - Code of Civil Procedure - Res judicata.

 Section 11 CPC Description

No Court shall try any suit or issue in which the matter directly and substantially in issue has been directly and substantially in issue in a former suit between the same parties, or between parties under whom they or any of them claim, litigating under the same title, in a Court competent to try such subsequent suit or the suit in which such issue has been subsequently raised, and has been heard and finally decided by such Court.


Explanation I- The expression "former suit" shall denote a suit which has been decided prior to the suit in question whether or not it was instituted prior thereto.


Explanation II.- For the purposes of this section, the competence of a Court shall be determined irrespective of any provisions as to a right of appeal from the decision of such Court.


Explanation III.- The matter above referred to must in the former suit have been alleged by one party and either denied or admitted, expressly or impliedly, by the other.


Explanation IV.- Any matter which might and ought to have been made ground of defence or attack in such former suit shall be deemed to have been a matter directly and substantially in issue in such suit.



Explanation V.- Any relief claimed in the plaint, which is not expressly granted by the decree, shall, for the purposes of this section, be deemed to have been refused.


Explanation VI- Where persons litigate bona fide in respect of public right or of a private right claimed in common for themselves and others, all persons interested in such right shall, for the purposes of this section, be deemed to claim under the persons so litigating.


[Explanation VII.- The provisions of this section shall apply to a proceeding for the execution of a decree and reference in this section to any suit, issue or former suit shall be construed as references, respectively, to proceedings for the execution of the decree, question arising in such proceeding and a former proceeding for the execution of that decree.


Explanation VIII.-An issue heard and finally decided by a Court of limited jurisdiction, competent to decide such issue, shall operate as res judicata in as subsequent suit, notwithstanding that such Court of limited jurisdiction was not competent to try such subsequent suit or the suit in which such issue has been subsequently raised.]


COMMENTS


(i) The principle of res judicata is a procedural provision. A jurisdictional question if wrongly decided would not attract the principles of res judicata. When an Order is passed without jurisdiction, the same becomes a nullity. When an Order is a nullity, it cannot be supported by invoking procedural principle; Management of Sonepat Co-op. Sugar Mills Ltd. v. Ajit Singh, AIR 2005 SC 1050.


(ii) There is a distinction between issue estoppel and res judicata. Res judicata debars a court from exercising its jurisdiction to determine the lis if it has attained finality whereas the doctrine of issue estoppel is invoked against the party. If such issue is decided against him, he would be estopped from raising the same in the latter proceedings. The doctrine of res judicata creats a different kind of estoppel viz. estoppel by Accord; Bhanu Kumar Jain v. Archana Kumar, AIR 2005 SC 626.


(iii) First writ petition filed on the ground of apprehended bias and subsequent second petition was filed on allegations of actual bias, is not barred by res judicata; G.N. Nayak v. Goa University, AIR 2002 SC 790.


(iv) Section 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure has no doubt some technical aspects for instance the rule of constructive res judicata may be said to be technical but the basis of which the said rule rests is founded on the consideration of public policy; Sumer Mal v. State of Rajasthan, AIR 2000 Raj 1.


(v) The technical principle of res judicata would not be operative more so, if substantial change in circumstances is averred and found prima facie justified; Smt. Rehana Parveen v. Naimuddin, AIR 2000 MP 1.


(vi) Assuming, the cause of action in both the suits was based upon title in the suit land and was akin in all the cases, yet, as referred to above, in as much the earlier two suits were dismissed as withdrawn with permission to file fresh on the same cause of action, third suit will not be barred by any principle of law; Harbhagwan v. Smt. Punni Devi, AIR 1999 P&H 223.


(vii) Where the Sangh has been duly represented in the previous court proceedings and were litigating bona fidely which resulted in failure cannot be allowed to lay any objection in execution or to plead nullity of decree hence doctrine of res judicata applies. The decree of ejectment will bind every member of Sangh; Singhai Lal Chand Jain v. Rashtriya Swayam Sewak Sangh, Panna, JT 1996(3) SC 64.


1. Ins. by Act No. 104 of 1976, sec. 6 (w.e.f. 1-2-1977).

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Empowering Businesses: Virtual Corporate Law Services

  Empowering Businesses: Virtual Corporate Law Services In the dynamic world of business, legal support is crucial to ensure smooth operations, mitigate risks, and navigate regulatory landscapes. Lexis and Company offers Virtual Corporate Law Services to businesses in the UK, USA, Canada, Singapore, Dubai, and Australia , assisting with mergers, acquisitions, business contracts, compliance, and corporate governance. Key Features of Virtual Corporate Law Services 1. Mergers and Acquisitions (M&A) Legal Support We provide comprehensive legal services for mergers and acquisitions , including due diligence, structuring deals, drafting agreements, and navigating regulatory approvals. Benefits: Ensures smooth and legally sound M&A transactions. Minimizes risks during corporate restructuring. Protects your business interests in high-value deals. Trending Hashtags: #MergersAndAcquisitions #BusinessDeals #CorporateLaw #LegalSupport #VirtualLegalExperts 2. Business Contracts and Ag...
Post a Comment
Read more

Concept of constitutionalism

  Concept of constitutionalism Who Started Constitutionalism? John Locke - The English Bill of Rights is a foundational constitutional document that helped inspire the American Bill of Rights. Political theorist  John Locke  played a huge role in cementing the philosophy of constitutionalism.  Constitution is a written law which describes the structure of Government, the rules according to which the Govt. must work and the boundaries within which the Govt. must work. Constitutionalism   can be defined as the doctrine that governs the legitimacy of government action, and it implies something far more important than the idea of legality that requires official conduct to be in accordance with pre-fixed legal rules. Constitution constitution is the document that contains the basic and fundamental law of the nation, setting out the organization of the government and the principles of the society. Basic norm (or law) of the state; System of integration and organi...
Post a Comment
Read more

Nathulal v. State of Madhya Pradesh AIR 1966 SC 43

 Nathulal v. State of Madhya Pradesh AIR 1966 SC 43 CITATION AIR 1966 SC 43 COURT Supreme Court of India JUDGES/CORAM Justice K.S. Shah and Justice R. Bachawat DATE OF JUDGEMENT 22.03.1965 Facts: The facts of the case are as follows: The appellant was a dealer in a food grains at Dhar in Madhya Pradesh prosecuted in the Court of Additional District Magistrate for possessing in stock maunds and 21/4 seers of wheat for the purpose of sale without license. Subsequently appellant was charged for committing an offence under section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955. Thereafter the appellant pleaded there was no intention to contravene any provisions of the law and the grains were stored upon filing an application for license and upon believe that it will be issued to him. The appellant further stated that he continued to submit returns on the food grains stored and purchased to the respected authority. Thus, the appellant was acquitted in the Court of Additional District Magistra...
Post a Comment
Read more