Rajeev transferred a piece of land by way of registered sale deed

transferring all the right, title and interest in favour of the Jasoda.

A suit came to be filed by one Ashok against the Jasoda in the court
of Civil Judge Junior Division praying for a decree of “Permanent
Injunction” on the ground that disputed land was the subject matter
of an oral agreement of sale between him and Rajeev. He further
contended that Rajeev is in possession of the disputed land on the
strength of the Patta executed by the State Government. Learned
Civil Court decreed the suit holding that Ashok is in possession of
the disputed land on the date of institution of suit.

Jasoda subsequently filed a suit for declaration of title and recovery

of possession, wherein, both Rajeev and Ashok were impleaded as
party defendant.

Ashok also filed a suit for Specific Performance of contract against

the Rajeev.

Both the suits were tried by consolidating them, thereafter, learned

trial court allowed the suit filed by the Jasoda, while rejecting the
suit filed by Ashok .

Two appeals were filed by Ashok one against the judgment and
decree, whereby, his suit was dismissed and second against the
judgment and decree, whereby, the suit of Jasoda was decreed as
prayed for by her. Both the appeals were dismissed by the district
judge, therefore, the Ashok filed the second appeal challenging the
judgment and decree passed in appeal. In the appeal the question of
law was raised that the suit filed by Jasoda for declaration of title
and restoration of possession was barred by principle of ‘Res-
Judicata’

Argued the second appeal either on behalf of Jasoda or Ashok.