Back
1925 Supreme(Oudh) 191
HIGH COURT OF OUDH
Wazir Hasan, A.J.C.
Bhondai Miser - Appellant
Versus
Ram Prasad Miser - Respondent
Decided On : 10-08-1925
JUDGMENT
Wazir Hasan, A J C - This appeal was first heard under Order 41, Rule 11, of the Code of Civil Procedure and the facts are stated in the order, dated the 3rd April 1925, admitting the appeal for notice. It will serve no useful purpose to repeat the facts in this judgment. The only issue for decision is whether the plaintiff-appellant's case is barred by res judicata. I have no doubt in my mind that it is. The respondents brought a suit to recover this property as against appellant and other persons, and the title on which the suit was founded was that the respondent, Ram Prasad, was the nearest reversioner to the estate of one Baij Nath, to whom the property in suit admittedly belonged. Ram Prasad's title succeeded and he obtained a decree as against the plaintiff-appellant. It appears that either during the pendency of the suit or soon afterwards the appellant redeemed a usufructuary mortgage existing on the property in suit and obtained possession. His defence as against the plea of res judicata is that the redemption having taken place subsequent to the institution of the previous suit the decision in that suit did not operate as res judicata. This is a fallacious argument. On the question of title that decision is clearly res judicata and the plaintiff-appellant cannot be allowed to go behind it by pleading the subsequent redemption for the simple reason that he had no title to redeem.
2. The appeal fails and is dismissed with costs.
