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.

JUDGMENT :

Mahendar Kumar Goyal, J. - This civil revision petition is directed against the order dated 14.09.2023 passed by the learned Additional District Judge No.6, Jaipur Metropolitan-II, Jaipur (for brevity "the learned trial Court") in Civil Suit CIS No.397/2013 whereby, an application filed by the petitioners/defendants (hereinafter referred to as "the defendants") under Order 7, Rule 11 CPC, has been dismissed.

2. The relevant facts in brief are that the respondent/plaintiff (for short "the plaintiff") filed a suit for declaration, mandatory and permanent injunction against the defendants stating therein that he has been a life time member of the defendant No.1- Khandelwal Vaish Mahasabha (for brevity "the Mahasabha") since the year 1979. It was averred that vide order dated 29.07.2023 issued by the defendant No.2, his primary membership was suspended pending enquiry and thereafter, vide order dated 05.08.2023, the defendant No.2 expelled him from membership for a period of six years in violation of the provisions contained under the constitution of the Mahasabha. Therefore, the decree as aforesaid was prayed for. Therein, the defendants filed an application under Order 7, Rule 11 CPC raising objection as to maintainability of the suit on account of the provisions contained in the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short" the Act of 1996"). The application has been dismissed by the learned trial Court vide order dated 14.09.2023, impugned herein.

3. Assailing the order, learned counsel for the defendants submits that the learned trial Court erred in dismissing the application without appreciating that Clause 22 of the constitution of the Mahasabha provides for resolution of disputes by a five member committee and it further bars filing of any suit by a member directly to the Civil Court. He, therefore, prays that the civil revision petition be allowed, the order dated 14.09.2023 be quashed and set aside and their application under Order 7, Rule 11 CPC be allowed. He, in support of his submissions, relies upon a judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in case of M/s. Asian Avenues Pvt. Ltd. v. Sri Syed Shoukat Hussain : 2023 (2) Apex Court Judgments 37 (S.C.).

4. Per contra, learned counsel for the plaintiff would submit that the learned trial Court did not er in dismissing the application filed by the defendants under Order 7, Rule 11 CPC. He submits that on an earlier occasion, an application filed by the defendants under Section 8 of the Act of 1996 raising similar objection was dismissed by the learned trial Court vide order dated 05.09.2023 which operates as res judicata in the instant case. He, therefore, prays for dismissal of the revision petition.

5. Heard. Considered.

6. Indisputably, the defendants have filed an application under Section 8 of the Act of 1996 for referring the matter to the Arbitrator in view of Clause 22 of the constitution of the Mahasabha. Recording a categorical finding that Clause 22 of the constitution of the Mahasabha had no applicability in the instant case as also that in view of challenge in the suit by the plaintiff to the provisions of Clause 22 of the constitution of the Mahasabha, the plaintiff could not be debarred from his civil right to file the suit, learned trial Court dismissed the application vide order dated 05.09.2023. Thereafter, in the garb of the application under Order 7, Rule 11 CPC, the defendants have raised similar objection. It is trite law that principle of res judicata as also constructive judicata is applicable at t