SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1999 Supreme(SC) 628

1999 (9) Supreme 502
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
V.N. Khare and R.C. Lahoti, JJ.
N. Anappa -Appellant
versus
State of Karnataka -Respondents
Civil Appeal No. 3001 of 1999
Decided on 10-5-1999

Headnote:Code of Civil Procedure, 1908-Section 11-Resjudicate-Application before Administrative Tribunal Challenging gradation list-Dismissal for want of material keeping open all contentions raised-Subsequent application-Dismissal on ground of resjudicata-Not jusitfiable-Earlier application dismissed not on merit-Second application not barred by res judicata. (Paras 3 & 4)

       

ORDER

1. Leave granted.

2. The appellant herein filed an application before the Karnataka Administrative Tribunal, challenging the gradation list. For want of material, the Tribunal rejected the said application, keeping open all the contentions raised in the said application. Subsequently, the appellant filed another application before the Tribunal. When the application came up for hearing, the Tribunal dismissed the same on the ground that it was barred by the principles of res judicata. Thereafter, the appellant took the matter to the High Court. The High Court affirmed the judgment of the Tribunal. It is against these orders that the appellant is in appeal before us.

3. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and having perused the records, we find that when on an earlier occasion the appellant approached the Tribunal, the Tribunal rejected the application of the appellant by observing as follows :

"for want of any material, it is not possible for us to consider the application before us. Hence we dismiss this application keeping open all the contentions raised."

4. From the aforesaid observation, it is clear that the Tribunal did not dismiss the application of the appellant on merits , more so, kept all the contentions raised in the application to be agitated subsequently. In view of the said fact, it was not correct on the part of the Tribunal and the High Court to have rejected the second application on the ground that the second application was barred by the principles of res judicata. We, accordingly, set aside the orders dated 13-1-1998 and 27-1-1998 and send the matter back to the Tribunal for deciding Application No. 5949 of 1996 filed by the appellant on merits. The appeal is allowed accordingly. However, there shall be no order as to costs.

(C.R.) Appeal allowed.

*************

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

SupremeToday

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top