The principle of res-judicata as enshrined in Section 11 of CPC aims to prevent multiplicity of proceedings and accords finality to an issue that has been definitively settled by judicial decision.

PRATHIBA M. SINGH, J.

1. This appeal arises out of order dated 4th November 2016 of the Ld. Trial Court by which the suit filed by Sh. Shankar Goswami-Appellant/Plaintiff (hereinafter, Plaintiff) has been dismissed as being barred by res-judicata.

2. The background of this litigation is that a suit came to be filed being CS No. 759/2010 (hereinafter, Suit No. 1) by Smt. Sarita Goswami- the wife of Sh. Vijay Goswami. Sh. Shankar Goswami and Sh. Vijay Goswami are real brothers. Smt. Sarita Goswami filed a suit for recovery of possession, damages and mesne profits in respect of property being First Floor K-139 ad measuring 25 sq. yds. situated at Dakshinpuri, New Delhi seeking a recovery of possession and damages against Sh. Shankar Goswami. The prayer sought in the said suit was as under:

“PRAYER

In view of the facts and circumstances mentioned above, it is therefore most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble court may kindly be pleased:-

(I) To pass a Decree of Recovery of Possession of the top floor of the premises bearing No. K-139, Dakshinpuri, Delhi-62 more specifically shown red in the site plan attached in favour of the plaintiff.

(II) To pass an order for recovery of damages at the rate of Rs. 1,500/- per month excluding the charges from the date of receipt of the notice dated 8.04.2010 and till the date of handing over physical vacant possession of the property in question.

(III) To the cost of the suit may also be awarded to the plaintiff.

(IV) Any other order/orders, which deems fit and proper by this Hon'ble court, may also be awarded to the plaintiff.

It is prayed accordingly.”

3. The issues framed in Suit No. 1 are as under:

“1. Whether there is no cause of action to file the present suit and hence, suit is liable to be dismissed? OPP

2. Whether plaintiff is entitled to decree of possession of the top floor of the suit premises, as prayed in prayer No. A? OPP

3. Whether the plaintiff is entitled to recover the damages as prayed for in prayer No. B? OPP

4. Relief, if any.”

4. Vide final judgment dated 22nd July, 2014, Suit No. 1 for possession and damages was decreed by the Civil Judge in the following terms:

“RELIEF

As a consequence to my findings on the above mentioned issues, suit of the plaintiff is decreed and defendant is directed to hand over the vacant possession of the portion at top floor of the suit property bearing no. K-139, Dakshin Puri, Delhi-110062 particularly shown in red color in the site plan to the plaintiff within one month from today. The plaintiff is also entitled to damages @ 1500/- per month from 23.04.2010 till realization alongwith interest @ 9% per annum from the date of filing of the suit till realization. No orders as to cost. Decree sheet pre prepared accordingly.”

5. This judgment was carried in appeal and vide judgment dated 12th May, 2015, the appeal was dismissed. A Regular Second Appeal was preferred before this Court against judgment dated 12th May, 2015 which was also dismissed on 4th September, 2015. The SLP against the said order was dismissed on 8th January, 2016. Thus, the decree for possession and damages passed in Suit No. 1 acquired finality.

6. Thereafter, the Plaintiff - Sh. Shankar Goswami filed the present Suit No. 56/2016 (hereinafter, Suit No. 2) for declaration, possession and injunction in which summons were issued on 24th February, 2016. The relief prayed for in this suit is as under:

“PRAYER

In view of the facts and circumstances mentioned above, it is therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased:

(I) To pass a decree of declaration to the effect that the suit property i.e. K-139, Dakshinpuri, New Delhi-62 is not a self acquired property of the defendant no. 1 rather the said property is benami property of the family consisting the plaintiff and the defendant no. 2.

(II) To pass a decree of declaration that the judgment and decree dated 22.07.2014 whereby the court of Sh. Vishal Pahuja, Civil Judge – 04, (South) Saket Court, Delhi held t