Back
SHARAD KUMAR SHARMA
Arun Vijay Sati – Appellant
Versus
Dinesh Chandra Thapliyal – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
SHARAD KUMAR SHARMA, J.
1. Before answering the arguments, as it has been extended by the learned Senior Counsel for the revisionist, this Court feels it apt to deal with the circumstances, under which the impugned order dated 5th June 2022, as it has been rendered in Civil Suit No. 1 of 2017, Dinesh Chandra Thapliyal and Another vs. Ramesh Chandra Thapliyal and Another, was rendered by the Court below, whereby the two issues being issue No. 8, with regard to the implications of Section 11 of the CPC and the issue No. 9 with regard to attracting the bar of institution of the proceedings of Suit under Order 7 Rule 11 of CPC, has been answered against the defendants/revisionist by the impugned order, which is under challenge.
2. The factual backdrop of the instant case, which requires consideration is, that earlier a Civil Suit, being Civil Suit No. 41 of 1992, Ramesh Chandra Thapliyal vs. Smt. Deveswari Devi and Others, was instituted before the Court of Civil Judge, Pauri Garhwal, by invoking the provisions contained under Section 34 and 38 of the Specific Relief Act, wherein the “subject matter” which has been argued by the learned Senior Counsel for the revisionist, as if
The cause of action for a subsequent suit must be different from the cause of action in earlier suits for res-judicata to apply.
The principle of res judicata bars re-litigation of matters already decided, confirming that the earlier judgment is binding and the current suit is not maintainable.
In order to decide whether suit is barred by any law, it is statement in plaint which will have to be construed. Defence made by defendant in suit must not be considered while deciding merits of appl....
The court held that a plaint can only be rejected under Order VII Rule 11 if it does not disclose a cause of action, and the issue of limitation is a mixed question of law and fact.
Trial courts must adjudicate all issues in a suit, and failure to do so violates procedural requirements under CPC, necessitating remand.
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
