RES JUDICATA AND RES SUB JUDICE

• Res judicata’ is a Latin maxim that says the ‘matter has been decided. This
doctrine states that when a suit has been heard by the court on similar facts and
issues, a final judgment is passed. If the issue is no longer appealable, then this
doctrine prohibits continuing the proceedings on the same grounds and same
parties.
• On the other hand, ‘res sub judice’ is also a Latin maxim that means ‘under the
judgment’. When parties file two or more suits on the same matter, then the
competent court has the authority to hold the parallel proceedings of the suit.
The doctrine ordains a stay of suit to avoid duplication and contrary orders.
• Res judicata
• Res means a subject matter, and judicata means adjudged. The doctrine of res
judicata is adopted from ‘res judicata pro veritate accipitur’ which states that
once the decision has been made, it must be accepted as true and final. It
developed from English common law. The common law system was developed
from the fundamental idea of judicial uniformity. Res judicata was initially
adopted from common law into the Code of Civil Procedure, and later it was
adopted into the Indian legal system. Section 11 of the CPC deals with the
provision of res judicata. According to this Section, a court can not entertain
any suit which has been settled on similar facts and issues as those that were
directly or subsequently dealt with in a former suit. The proceedings took place
• The doctrine, which is also known as claim preclusion, prohibits a party from starting new legal
actions against the same parties over the same facts and grounds.Several times, a party initiates the
proceedings again just to harass the other party. Hence, to prevent the repentance of filing a similar
suit, this doctrine is applicable.
• In Satyadhyan Ghosal and Others v. Sm. Deorajin Debi and Another (1960), the Supreme Court
explained that the doctrine of res judicata emphasizes the final settlement of the matter. No party
will be permitted to raise the same issue in a subsequent suit or proceeding between the same
parties when a matter, whether on a question of fact or law, has been resolved between two parties
in a single proceeding and the decision is final, either because no appeal was filed with a higher
court or because the appeal was rejected, or because no appeal is viable.
• In Daryao and Others v. The State Of U. P. and Others(1961), the Supreme Court observed that the
principle of res judicata, which states that litigation must conclude, is a fundamental principle
shared by all courts and does not merely apply to records.
• In Lal Chand (Dead) By L.Rs. & Ors v. Radha Kishan(1976), the Supreme Court stated that once
the final decision is made earlier, judges consider it as the res judicata in the present suit that is
filed between the same parties.
• The doctrine of res judicata is based on certain maxims, which are the
following:
• Nemo debet lis vexari pro eadem causa:
• This maxim states that ‘no person is tried twice in a similar kind of suit’. It is
applicable in both types of suits, civil and criminal, to put an end to the litigation
process. Article 20(2) of the Indian Constitution also says that no person shall be
prosecuted and punished twice.
• Interest republicae ut sit finis litium:
• The meaning of the maxim is that there should be an end to litigation since it is in
the interests of the nation.
• Re judicata pro veritate occipitur:
• It means a judicial decision must be accepted as it is.
Purpose of Res judicata
• The doctrine of res judicata applies to all civil and criminal cases and is based on
the principles of justice, equity, and good conscience. The main aim of the doctrine
is to restrict the process of re-litigation. The other purpose of the doctrine is as
follows:
• It prevents the time and resources of the court from being misused.
• It provides a safeguard for the defendant from damage.
• It prevents the conflict between the parties in a matter that has been officially
resolved by bringing a verdict to an end and barring any future claims.
• It prevents the confusion that might be caused by multiple judgments in a single
suit.
Essentials of Res judicata
• The essentials of res judicata are as follows:
• There should be one former and one subsequent suit filed.
• The matter is directly and substantially related to the subsequent suit.
• The parties who filed suit must be similar to the parties who filed the former suit
also.
• The titles of both suits are also the same.
• The suit must be filed in the competent jurisdiction.
• The court must have previously heard and decided the issue that is directly and
• Exceptions of Res judicata
• The doctrine of res judicata restricts the parties from re-filing the litigation
procedure, but there are certain circumstances when this doctrine is not applicable.
• When the decree and order have been obtained by committing fraud and
misrepresentation of the facts or issues.
• When the judgment is not pronounced on the merits.
• When the special leave petition was dismissed without making a proclamation or
determination of the judgment.
• When the subsequent lawsuits have a different cause of action. If a later lawsuit has
a separate cause of action, the court cannot dismiss it.
• When the court did not have competent jurisdiction in the former suit.
• When there is a question of law.
• When an interlocutory order had been passed in a former suit.
• If there is any amendment to an existing law that grants new rights to the party then
the doctrine will not apply.
• When the suit was dismissed by default.
• If the party does not raise a plea for res judicata.
• Res sub judice
• The term ‘res’ means matter, and ‘sub judice’ means under consideration. Hence,
the doctrine means a matter which is still under consideration. Section 10 of the
CPC says that no court can initiate such proceedings between the same parties and
the same issues which were directly or subsequently in question in the previous
suit if the previous suit is still pending in the competent court. The doctrine of res
sub judice aims to stay the proceedings when two or more cases are filed in the
same court between the same parties. The objective of the doctrine is to avoid
wasting the time in court and avoid contradictory decisions in the same suit. It also
protects the parties from unnecessary court proceedings and harassment by other
parties. The doctrine is applicable to a trial of the suit, appeals, and revision. It
does not prevent a court from issuing temporary orders for the granting of an
injunction or a stay.
• In Escorts Const. Equipment Ltd v. Action Const. Equipments Ltd (1998), the Delhi
High Court observed that to invoke Section 10 of the Code, there must be a matter
at issue and the parties are the same in a former and subsequent suit; a former
lawsuit that was filed in a court with the jurisdiction to grant the desired relief,
whether it was in the same court or another.
• In Indian Bank v. Maharashtra State Co-Operative Marketing Federation (1998)
, the Supreme Court stated that the purpose of the doctrine of res sub judice is to
avoid contradictory rulings on the subject at hand by preventing courts with
jurisdiction from trying two parallel matters at once.
• In the case of Arumugha Udayar Rep. by Power v. Lakshmi (2005), the Madras
High Court stated that to invoke Section 10 of the Code, there must be four essential
conditions:
• The matter at issue in the second lawsuit is also, significantly and directly at issue in
the first lawsuit;
• The parties involved in the second lawsuit are the same as the parties under whom
they claimed to act on their behalf or any of them;
• The second lawsuit’s relief is admissible in the court where the initial lawsuit was
filed;
• The previous suit must be pending in the competent court, or any court situated in
India, or the Supreme Court, or any court, or in any court established or formed by
the Central Government outside of India.
• PURPOSE
• Res sub judice
• The doctrine of res sub judice also aims to save the judiciary time from
unnecessary suits. Apart from this, there are a few more objectives of the doctrine
which are as follows:
• It allows the plaintiff to file one suit for all the issues and facts against the same
defendant.
• Avoid contradictory decisions on a similar matter in issue.
• Stop the courts with concurrent jurisdiction from concurrently hearing and making
decisions on two parallel lawsuits involving the same claim, same issue, and similar
remedy.
• Protect the defendant from paying compensation or damages twice.
• Prevent unnecessary confusion.
• ESSENTIALS
• The essentials of res sub judice are as follows:
• There must be two civil suits between the same parties.
• The former suit is pending before the competent court for final decision and the
subsequent suit is brought.
• The subsequent suit is also filed under a similar title to the former suit.
• Any suit that is pending in a foreign court does not invoke Section 10 of the Code.
• If the subsequent application is filed before the Tahsildar and the suit is pending
before the court, then it will fall under the scope of the doctrine.
• The date of the plaint presentation is considered for the institution of the suit, and
the appeal is also included in the suit.
• The court must have the inherent power to stay the proceedings.
• If a decree is passed for violation of Section 10 will be null and void.
• The parties can waive their right under Section 10.
• The court has the power to pass interim orders.