RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Mahendar Kumar Goyal, J.
Smt. Munni Devi W/o Late Prabhat & Ors. - Appellants
Versus
Ramsahai S/o Ladu, (Since Deceased) & Ors. - Respondents
S.B. Civil Revision Petition No. 33 of 2023
Decided On : 25-04-2023
Res Judicata - Civil Suit - Order 7 Rule 11 CPC - The court emphasized the principle of res judicata, stating that once an application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC is dismissed, a similar subsequent application cannot be entertained, reinforcing the finality of earlier decisions.
Fact of the Case:
The plaintiff filed a suit for declaration and injunction against the defendants. The defendants' application to reject the plaint under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC was dismissed by the trial court, leading to this civil revision petition.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the defendants' subsequent application raised the same objections as the earlier dismissed application, thus falling under the principle of res judicata, which bars re-litigation of the same issue.
Issues: Whether the trial court erred in dismissing the defendants' application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC based on the principle of res judicata.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that principles of res judicata apply to subsequent applications in the same proceedings, preventing parties from rearguing previously decided matters.
Result: The civil revision petition is dismissed.
ORDER
1. This civil revision petition is directed against the order dated 15.11.2022 passed by the learned Additional District Judge No.3, Jaipur District, Jaipur (for brevity, 'the learned trial Court') in Civil Suit No.169/2013 (277/2008) whereby, an application filed by the petitioners/defendants no.1 to 5 (for brevity, 'the petitioners') under Order 7 Rule 11 read with Section 151 CPC has been dismissed.
2. The relevant facts in brief are that the respondent no.1/plaintiff (for brevity, 'the plaintiff') filed a suit for declaration and injunction against the petitioners and the respondents no.2 to 8. An application filed by the petitioners therein under Order 7 Rule 11 read with Section 151 CPC for rejection of the plaint has been dismissed by the learned trial Court vide its order dated 15.11.2022.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the learned trial Court erred in rejecting their application on the premise that their earlier similar application dated 16.04.2021 came to be dismissed vide order dated 19.08.2021. Inviting attention of this Court towards the order dated 19.08.2021 dismissing the earlier application filed by them, learned counsel submits that therein, the learned trial Court did not appreciate the objection raised by them as to maintainability of the civil suit and hence, the second application was maintainable. She, in support of her submission, relies upon a judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in case of UP State Road Transport Corporation Vs. State of UP & Another: (2005) 1 SCC 444. She, therefore, prays that the civil revision petition be allowed, the order dated 15.11.2022 be quashed and set aside and the application filed by the petitioners under Order 7 Rule 11 read with Section 151 CPC be allowed.
4. Heard. Considered.
5. Indisputably, the petitioners have filed an earlier application dated 16.04.2021 under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC seeking rejection of the plaint alleging that without seeking declaration as to his khatedari rights, the suit filed by the plaintiff was not maintainable. The application came to be dismissed by the learned trial Court vide its order dated 19.08.2021 which has attained finality. Thereafter, the instant application filed by the petitioners raising similar objection has been dismissed vide order dated 15.11.2022, impugned herein. It is trite law that the principles of res judicata/constructive judicata are applicable in the subsequent stages of same proceedings during pendency of the suit. A coordinate Bench of this Court has, in case of Sahina Vs. Returning Officer (Panchayat) Gram Panchayat Jhiwana, Panchayat Samiti Tijara & Ors., S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.6916/2017, vide order dated 10.05.2017 held as under:-
The principle of res judicata applies to subsequent applications in the same proceedings, barring re-litigation of previously decided issues.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the necessity to consider only the averments in the plaint while deciding whether a suit is barred by res judicata, as emphasized by the latest jud....
The limited application of Order 7 Rule 11(d) of the CPC and the inapplicability of the plea of res-judicata at the stage of deciding the application under Order 7 Rule 11.
An application for plaint rejection under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC only evaluates the plaint's contents without considering the defendant's defense. Res judicata principles need comprehensive analysis bey....
The court emphasized that res judicata requires evidence examination and cannot be solely decided at the pre-trial stage, allowing grounds to be raised in written statements.
The principle of res judicata applies to repeated applications under Order 7, Rule 11 CPC, prohibiting the re-raising of previously dismissed objections, ensuring judicial efficiency.
The principle of res judicata cannot serve as a basis for rejecting a plaint under Order VII Rule 11 of the CPC; it must be framed as a preliminary issue in trial.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.