Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Scanned Judgements…!
Checking relevance for Experion Developers Private Limited VS Himanshu Dewan And Sonali Dewan...
Experion Developers Private Limited VS Himanshu Dewan And Sonali Dewan - 2023 5 Supreme 735 : Under the Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Section 11, the principle of res judicata applies only where the lis was inter-parties and has attained finality on the issues involved. It does not apply in cases where the judgment or order was passed by a court having no jurisdiction or involving a pure question of law. Additionally, any evidence sought to be produced at the appellate stage can only be introduced through an appropriate application under Rule 27 to Order XLI of the CPC, and an order must be passed taking such evidence on record. The National Commission was required to consider and examine the appellant''''s contentions on the merits of the stipulation and increase in sale area, and could not overrule them on the grounds of res judicata or binding precedent, which do not apply in such circumstances.Checking relevance for Jamia Masjid VS K. V. Rudrappa (Since Dead) By Lrs. ...
Jamia Masjid VS K. V. Rudrappa (Since Dead) By Lrs. - 2021 6 Supreme 503 : The judgment in a representative suit under Section 92 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908, is binding on all interested parties. The court''''s decision in the first suit (OS 92 of 1950-51) would be binding on Jamia Masjid and would preclude it from instituting another suit on the same issue if it has been conclusively decided. This binding nature arises because a representative suit is intended to adjudicate matters on behalf of all interested parties, and the judgment operates as res judicata against them. The principle of res judicata, governed by Section 11 of the CPC, applies when the matter was directly and substantially in issue in a former suit between the same parties or those under whom they claim, litigating under the same title, and the matter was heard and finally decided by a competent court. The binding effect is not limited to the specific relief claimed but extends to all issues that were necessarily decided in the course of the judgment.Checking relevance for Faime Makers Pvt. Ltd. VS District Deputy Registrar, Co-Operative Societies (3), Mumbai...
Faime Makers Pvt. Ltd. VS District Deputy Registrar, Co-Operative Societies (3), Mumbai - 2025 4 Supreme 79 : The principle of res judicata under Section 11 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 applies to and binds quasi-judicial authorities. Whenever a judicial or quasi-judicial tribunal gives a finding on law or fact, its findings cannot be impeached collaterally or in a second round and are binding until reversed in appeal, revision, or by way of writ proceedings. A judicial or quasi-judicial decision binds, whether right or wrong, and any error in fact or law cannot be challenged except through appeal, revision, or writ, unless it relates to a jurisdictional matter. Once a Competent Authority (quasi-judicial in nature) settles an issue, that determination attains finality unless set aside in accordance with law.Checking relevance for Satyendra Kumar VS Raj Nath Dubey...
Satyendra Kumar VS Raj Nath Dubey - 2016 3 Supreme 357 : Under Section 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, a judgment in a former suit or proceeding acquires finality and binds the parties totally and completely on all issues relating to the subject matter of the suit or proceeding. This principle is based on the doctrine of res judicata, which prevents parties from being vexed twice for the same cause and ensures finality in litigation. However, res judicata applies only to issues of fact, not to pure questions of law. In cases involving a different cause of action or different property, even between the same parties, res judicata does not apply. A subsequent court is competent to decide a pure question of law differently from a previous court, and such a decision cannot be precluded by principles of equity or estoppel. The binding nature of a judgment is thus limited to the specific subject matter, cause of action, and issues of fact determined in the earlier proceeding.Checking relevance for Vishnu Dutt Sharma VS Daya Sapra...
Vishnu Dutt Sharma VS Daya Sapra - 2009 5 Supreme 258 : The judgment of a criminal court is not binding in a civil proceeding and does not operate as res judicata. Under Section 40 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, a previous judgment may be relevant only to determine whether a court ought to take cognizance of a suit, but it is not conclusive. Sections 42 and 43 of the Evidence Act further clarify that judgments other than those specified in Section 41 are not conclusive proof of what they state, and are only relevant if they relate to matters of public nature or are otherwise relevant under the Act. The finding in a criminal proceeding cannot be binding in a civil suit, and a civil suit cannot be rejected merely because the accused was acquitted in a criminal case. Order VII Rule 11(d) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, which allows rejection of a plaint if it is barred by any law, must be strictly construed and does not apply simply because a criminal case was dismissed. The civil suit must be decided on its own merits based on the evidence before the civil court.
