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

1990 Supreme(Cal) 124

AJIT KUMAR NAYAK
LAXMI MANI DASI – Appellant
Versus
MANIK CHANDRA DAS – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
MIHIR ROY, SUPRIYA CHATTOPADHYAY, TARUN CHATTEJEE

A. K. NAYAK, J.

( 1 ) THIS appeal by the plaintiff/appellant involves only a short question, of law as to whether a suit can be disposed of finally on the point of res judicata under Order 14 Rule 2 CPC treating as a bar to the suit created by law under clause (b) of sub-role (2) of Rule 2 of Order 14 CPC. After careful consideration, I have no hesitation to hold that when the facts are admitted, a question which has been decided fully and anally being an issue, directly and substantially, in the previous suit as in the present suit, it, no doubt, stands as, a bar to the subsequent suit, and in that case, res judicata also operates as a bar to the suit created by law as contemplated under clause (b) of sub-rule (2) of Rule 2 of Order 14 CPC.

( 2 ) TO elucidate this point of law, let us refer to the facts of this case. The present suit, out of which this appeal arises, being Title Suit No. 166 of 1979 is the Second Court of Munsif, Jangipur has been brought by Laxmi Mani Dasi for declaration of her title to the suit property, comprising plot No. 23 of Khatian No, 199 of Mouza Kaiyor, and for permanent injunction restraining the defendant/respondent Manik Chandra Das from disturbin











Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top