Wednesday, 26 January 2022



  • Meaning

The doctrine of Res Judicata has been described under section 11 of CPC. The doctrine of the Res Judicata refers to the matter which is already judged. It means that no court will have the authority to try any new suit or issue which has been already judged in the previous suit between the same parties. Also, the court will not entertain the issues or suit between these parties under whom the same parties are litigating under the same issue, and the title is already been decided by the capable court. When the court comes across any issues or suits which have been already judged and decided by the court and there is no matter pending before in court, the court has the authority to dismiss the case by admitting a decree of Res Judicata. This doctrine is established on the grounds that if the issue is already decided by the court, then no one has the power to reopen it with the consecutive suit. It also states the conclusiveness of the judgments as to the contents decided, in every consecutive suit among the same parties. The doctrine of Res Judicata is exercised by the court in the cases where issues directly and consecutively involving the same parties in the prior and present suit, are the same.

  • Scope of Doctrine of Res Judicata

The scope of the Res Judicata is not limited to section 11. Res Judicata is the concept that is also enforced in Constitutional Law, Administrative Law, and Criminal matters. It is used in other laws and acts too. In the case Sheoprasad Singh v. Ramnandan Prasad Singh , Sir Lawerence Jenkins analysed the rule of Res Judicata as the rule while looking for old precedent is ordered by a wisdom which is for all time. In the case of Daryao v. the state of UP , the court described that for this tule there would be no finish to litigation and no safeguard for any person, the rights of the person involved will be in nonstop confusion and great partiality done in the name of the law. The doctrine of Res Judicata is made upon the Public Policy and this theory if intended not only to avoid new decisions but also to avoid new investigation so that the same individual cannot be harassed again in several suits about the same matter.

  • Essentials of Res Judicata under section 11 CPC

Prior to permitting a decision of Res Judicata following essentials should be fulfilled:

  1. There must be two suits one previous one and another consecutive suit.

  2. Parties of the previous and consecutive suit should be the same.

  3. The main matter of the consecutive suit should be similar or related to the previous suit either constructively or actually.

  4. The case must be finally ended between the parties.

  5. The previous suit should be decided by the court of appropriate jurisdiction.

  6. Parties in the previous, as well as consecutive suit must have been litigated under the identical title.

  • Does the Doctrine of Res Judicata is enforced to the Writ petitions?

A writ has been described in Articles 32 and 226 of the Indian Constitution. Article 32 has provided authority to Supreme Court to issue writs while the same authority is given to High Court under article 226. These five types of writs- Habeas corpus, Prohibition, Mandamus, Quo Warranto, and Certiorari

The problem that whether the doctrine of Res Judicata enforced the writ proceedings is still questionable. If the explanation of section 141 of CPC is analysed, one can see that section 11 is not enforceable to the proceedings in Article 226 of the constitution of India. But the doctrine of Res Judicata can be used in writ proceedings when there is the absence of the enforceability of section 11 of the code. Once the problem has been decided by the writ petition, it cannot be reopened by consecutive appeal. It is decided law that the doctrine of Res Judicata is used in Writ petition but there is one exception to this is that doctrine of Res Judicata should not infringe any fundamental rights of individuals. The court can use the principle of Res Judicata in the writ petition but it is required for the court to pass a speaking judgment. The court should provide proper logic while applying the doctrine of Res Judicata. For the writ of Habeas corpus, the doctrine of constructive Res Judicata would not enforce. If the petition is rejected as withdrawn, it cannot be a reason to a consecutive petition under article 32, because in such case, there has been no judgment on the merits by the court.


Res Judicata under Civil Procedure Code, 1908. Available on:,suit%20between%20the%20same%20parties.


Written by Parul Sharma

No comments:

Post a Comment

Equality before law

  Equality before law “The state shall not deny to any person equality before the law. Meaning of right to equality This means that every pe...