Res Judicata

The term of Res judicata is a Latin term which means “matter

adjudicated” or “thing decided”. The doctrine of Res Judicata refers to a legal
doctrine which prevents the same matter from being reheard or relitigated.
Section 11 of Civil Procedure Code,1908 provides for the doctrine of Res
Judicata as follows:
“No court shall try any suit or issue in which matter directly and substantially in
issue has been directly and substantially in issue in the former suit between the
same parties or between the parties under whom they or any of them claim,
litigating under same title in the court competent to try such subsequent suit or
the suit in which such issue has been subsequently raised, and has been heard
and finally decided by such court.”
From the provisions of section 11, we can derive that the power here is
given to the Court and not to the parties to the suit. It is duty of the court to
decide whether the doctrine of Res Judicata applies on the present suit or not
before proceeding with the matter.
We can say that the principle of Res judicata can based on three
principles:
1. No man should be vexed twice for the same cause of action. (nemo debet bit
vexari pro uno et eadem causa)
2. It is in the interest of the state to have the dispute resolved or to have an
end to a litigation. (interest republicae ut sit finis litium)
3. A judicial decision must be accepted as correct.
In the case of “Sheoprasad singh v Ramanandan Prasad Singh”, AIR
1916, it was held that “the rule is intended not only to prevent new decision but
also to prevent new investigation so that the same person cannot be harassed
again and again in different proceeding on the same question”.
This doctrine is therefore based on the Public Policy and the parties
cannot waive it even by consent.
Furthermore, the Supreme Court also explained the principle of Res
Judicata in the case of Lal Chand v Radha Krishna, AIR 1977 SC as:
“Section 11 of code of Civil Procedure, 1908 is not exhaustive and the principle
which motivates this section can be extended to cases which do not fall strictly
within the letter of law. The principle of Res Judicata is conceived in the larger
public interest which requires that all litigation must come to an end. The
principle also found on equity, justice and good conscience which requires that
a party which has once succeeded on an issue should not be permitted to be
harassed by a multiplicity of proceedings involving determination of same issue
or subject matter.”
The following conditions must be satisfied in order to constitute Res
Judicata:
1. Former Suit:
As provided in explanation 1 of section 11, “a former suit shall denote a
suit which has been decided prior to a suit in question whether or not it was
instituted prior thereto”.
The term former suit clearly shows that there must be two proceedings
or suits. Even when there are two suits or proceedings, the decision given
simultaneously cannot be decision in the former suit.
2. Competency of Court trying former suit:
Under section 11, it is necessary that the court trying the former suit
must be competent to try the subsequent suit itself.
In order to check competency of court, the court must have been either:
I. A court of exclusive jurisdiction, or
II. A court of concurrent jurisdiction competent to try subsequent suit.
III. Res Judicata operates on judgements of Courts of exclusive jurisdiction.
IV. The expression “the court of limited jurisdiction” is wide enough.
Explanation 8 to section 11 states about court of limited jurisdiction as:
“An issue heard and finally decided by a court of limited jurisdiction,
competent to decide such issue, shall operate as res judicata in a
subsequent suit, notwithstanding that such Court of limited jurisdiction
was not competent to try such subsequent suit or the suit in which such
issue has been subsequently raised.”
3. Matter Directly and Substantially in issue:
For the application of Res Judicata, the matter which is directly and
substantially in issue in former suit must be the matter directly and
substantially in issue in the second or subsequent suit. That is to say, the
subject matter of the suit, the cause of action and the parties to the suit must
be same to constitute Res Judicata.
 However, a matter cannot be directly and substantially in issue unless it
has been alleged by one party and either admitted or denied, expressly or
impliedly, by the other party as provided in explanation 3 to section 11 of Civil
Procedure Code, 1908.
To conclude, the doctrine of Res Judicata, rooted in the Latin Term meaning
of which is “matter adjudicated”, serves to prevent the same legal matter from
being relitigated in the subsequent proceedings or suit and thereby prevents
the multiplicity of cases of same nature to protect the precious time of the
Court. Section 11 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 outlines its application,
emphasizing the court’s role in determining its applicability. Res Judicata plays
an important role in maintaining judicial efficiency and ensuring fair and just
legal outcomes.
 One liners for the topic “Res Judicata”
1. Section 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure talks about- Res Judicata (Dispute
adjudicated).
2. Doctrine of Res Judicata is not applicable on the writ of- Writ of Habeus
Corpus.
3. “Any matter which ought to have been made a ground of defense or attack in
the former suit shall be deemed to be the matter directly and substantially in
issue in such suit”. This doctrine also called as- Constructive Res Judicata (Sec.
11 Explanation 4)
4. The legal doctrine prevents the same matter from being relitigated in the
court of law- Doctrine Res Judicata
5. The essentials of Res Judicata are- 1] that the litigating parties must be same
2] that the subject matter of dispute must be same (cause of action must be
same)
3] that the matter is finally decided between the parties
4] that the suit must be decided by the court of competent jurisdiction.
6. Difference between Double Jeopardy and Res Judicata- The Doctrine of
double jeopardy is used in criminal proceeding to prevent multiplicity of
proceedings whereas Doctrine of Res Judicata applies in civil proceedings to
prevent multiplicity of suits between the same parties on the same subject
matter and same cause of action.
7. The power has been given under sec.11 Civil Procedure Code, 1908- The
court is given power under section 11 of CPC, 1908.
8. The plea of Res Judicata differs from Order 2 Rule 2 as- Res Judicata relates
to the Plaintiff’s duty to put forward all the grounds of defense to support his
claim, whereas Order 2 Rule 2 requires the Plaintiff to claim all the reliefs
arising out of same cause of action. Both the pleas are different not including
one another.
9. Application of Res Judicata on Consent Decree- Res Judicata does not apply
to Consent or Compromise Decree.
10. Application of Res Judicata on the Arbitration proceedings- Res Judicata
applies on Arbitration proceedings as well as its Awards.
11. Where, in a suit, Res Judicata applies, the suit is- liable to be dismissed.
12. A decision or any finding given by a court without having jurisdiction-
cannot operate as Res Judicata.
13. The main object of the principle of Res Judicata- to have an end to the
litigation.
 Judgement

Case : Satyadhan Ghosal v Deorajin Debi, 1960

Facts:
1. This appeal is by the landlords who having obtained a decree for
ejectment against the tenants, Deorajin Debi and her minor son, on
February 10, 1949, have not yet been able to get possession in execution
thereof Soon after the decree was made the Calcutta Thika Tenancy Act,
1949, came on the statute book.

2. The tenants filed an application to set aside the said decree. That
application was dismissed on July 16, 1949. On September 9, 1949, an
application was made by the tenants under S. 28 of the Calcutta Thika
Tenancy Act alleging that they were Thika tenants and praying that the
decree made against them on February 2, 1949, may be rescinded.

3. Against this order the tenants moved the High Court of Calcutta under S.
115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the hon’ble High Court allowed the
application.

4. The landlords' application under s. 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure

against the Munsif's order was rejected by the High Court. The attempt of
the landlords to raise before the High Court again the question of the
applicability of s. 28 was unsuccessful, the learned judge who heard the
matter in the High Court being of opinion that this question as between
these parties was res judicata.

Held:
The principle of res judicata is based on the need of giving a finality to judicial
decisions. What it says is that once a res is judicata, it shall not be adjudged
again. Primarily it applies as between past litigation and future litigation. When
a matter-whether on a question of fact or on a question of law-has been
decided between two parties in one suit or proceeding and the decision is final,
either because no appeal was taken to a higher court or because the appeal
was dismissed, or no appeal lies, neither party will be allowed in a future suit
or proceeding between the same parties to canvass the matter again. This
principle of res judicata is embodied in relation to suits in s. 11 of the Code of
Civil Procedure; but even where s. 11 does not apply, the principle of res
judicata has been applied by courts for the purpose of achieving finality in
litigation. The result of this is that the original court as well as any higher court
must in any future litigation proceed on the basis that the previous decision
was correct. The principle of res judicata applies also as between two stages in
the same litigation to this extent that a court, whether the trial court or a
higher court having at an earlier stage decided a matter in one way will not
allow the parties to re-agitate the matter again at a subsequent stage of the
same proceedings. Does this however mean that because at an earlier stage of
the litigation a court has decided an interlocutory matter in one way and no
appeal has been taken therefrom or no appeal did lie, a higher court cannot at
a later stage of the same litigation consider the matter again.

In conclusion, the principle of res judicata serves a crucial purpose in the legal
system, offering finality to judicial decisions. It ensures that once a matter has
been conclusively decided between two parties in a prior legal proceeding, it
should not be endlessly re-litigated. This principle is not only essential for the
efficient functioning of the legal system but also for ensuring fairness and
preventing abuse of the judicial process.
Res judicata applies both to past and future litigation. When a matter has been
finally decided in a previous case, either because no appeal was pursued or
because the appeal was dismissed, it should not be reopened in subsequent
lawsuits between the same parties. This promotes legal certainty and prevents
parties from engaging in endless litigation over the same issues.