Back
KALYAN RAI SURANA
On the Death of Anil Kalita His Legal Heir Smt. Anima Kalita – Appellant
Versus
Toseswar Sarmah S/o Late Sukram Sarmah – Respondent
1. Heard Mr. P.S. Deka, learned senior counsel, assisted by Mr. B. Bhagwati, learned counsel for the appellants and Mr. N. Choudhury, learned counsel for the respondents.
2. Assailing concurrent finding, the present appeal under Section 100 CPC is directed against the First Appellate Court’s judgment and decree dated 12.11.2009 passed by the learned District Judge, Morigaon in T.A. 14/2009, by which the appeal was dismissed and the judgment and decree dated 31.03.2009, passed by the learned Munsiff No. 1, Morigaon in T.S. 25/2007, by which the suit was decreed on contest, was affirmed. The appellants are the principal defendant nos. 1 and 2 in the suit.
3. It would be appropriate to mention that on death of the appellant no. 1, he has been substituted by order dated 30.08.2017, passed in connected I.A. (C) 1724/2017. It may also be mentioned that the names of the respondent nos. 3 to 9, 11 and 16 have been struck off by order dated 19.02.2016. Therefore, only the principal respondent no. 1 (plaintiff) and the proforma respondent nos. 2, 10 and 12 to 15 (proforma defendant nos. 2, 9 and 11 to 14) remain as respondents in this appeal.
4. This appeal was admitted for hearing on the foll
Trial courts must adjudicate all issues in a suit, and failure to do so violates procedural requirements under CPC, necessitating remand.
The plea of res-judicata must be raised in the pleadings and substantiated by producing the copies of the pleadings, issues, and the judgment in the previous case. The substantial question of law pro....
The principle of res judicata applies when the same parties have litigated substantially the same issue in a previous suit, barring re-litigation of those issues.
The principle of res judicata applies where previous judgments on the same issue bind parties, regardless of claims involving part of the land. Judicial findings must reflect conscious application to....
The court established that a consent decree bars subsequent suits on the same matter, reinforcing the principles of res judicata and the limitations on challenging such decrees under the CPC.
The right to seek partition is inherent and continuous for co-owners; prior dismissal of a partition suit does not bar subsequent suits, provided the parties are different.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
