Doctrine of Res Judicata Meaning

Res Judicata: Introduction

Res judicata is the term which is evolved from the English Common Law System. Res judicata meaning has been provided under section 11 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908. The simple meaning of res-judicata is ‘A bar on re-litigation of the suit which one is already decided by another competent court between same parties and same subject matter.’

Table of Contents

Res Judicata Meaning

Res judicata meaning is given under section 11 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908. Whereas, ‘Rea’ means ‘subject matter’ and ‘judicata’ means ‘adjudged’ or ‘decided’. Therefore, together the meaning of res judicata in CPC is ‘a subject matter adjudged’ or ‘a subject matter decided’.

Res judicata meaning in law under section 11 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908, res judicata CPC is defined as ‘No Court shall try any suit or issue in which the matter directly and substantially in issue has been directly and substantially in issue in a former suit between the same parties, or between parties under whom they or any of them claim, litigating under the same title, in a 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.’

What is res judicata? In simple words, the doctrine res judicata means ‘the thing which has been judged by the court and the issue before another competent court has already decided a court between the same parties on the same subject matter.’

Therefore, in that scenario, the court will dismiss the case on the ground that the same case was decided by another court. The doctrine of res-judicata is made applicable in both civil cases and criminal cases.

Read Also:

Example - A filed a suit against B as he did not pay rent. Where B pleaded for the lessening of rent on the ground as the area of the land was less than the area of land mentioned in the agreement of the lease. The court found that the area of land was greater than the area shown in the agreement of the lease. The area was excess and the principles of res judicata will not apply. This is a res judicata example.

Origin of Doctrine of Res Judicata

Doctrine of res-judicata originated from three Roman maxims, these are;

Nemo debet lis vexari pro eadem cause

Nemo debet lis vexari pro eadem cause is the Latin maxim which means no one should be vexed for the same act twice. In simple words, Nobody can be harassed two times for the exact cause roughly.

This is the maxim on which the doctrine of res judicata is based. This expresses what in Criminal Law is known as the rule against Double Jeopardy i.e. the notion that a person should not be “vexed” or have to answer for themselves by being tried or punished more than once for any particular accusation against them.

Interest republicae ut sit finis litium

This is the Latin maxim which means 'in the interest of the society as a whole, the Litigation must come to an end'. In simple words, the meaning of interest republicae ut sit finis litium is to the interest of the state that there should be a limit to litigation

Res judicata pro vertate excipitur

Res judicata pro vertate excipitur means the judicial decision of the court must be accepted as correct. In simple words, when the competent court delivers its judgement on a matter in issue between the parties after a full trial should not be permitted to be agitated over again by the same court or any other court between the same parties in the same subject matter in issue. Therefore, a decision by the competent court after a full trial is binding on the parties to the suit.

Nature and Scope of Doctrine of Res judicata

There are two concepts which are included in the doctrine of res-judicata. One is claim preclusion and the other is issue preclusion. The issue of preclusion is also known as collateral estoppel.

The nature of the doctrine of res judicata is that the parties cannot sue each other again when the final judgment is delivered on the merits. Therefore, the same case cannot be filed against the same parties on the same subject matter or cause of action. Therefore, res judicata applies when one suit is decided by the competent court and another suit is pending before another court.

Doctrine of Res Judicata

Res judicata meaning and res judicata definition are given under section 11 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908, as, ‘No Court shall try any suit or issue in which the matter directly and substantially in issue has been directly and substantially in issue in a former suit between the same parties, or between parties under whom they or any of them claim, litigating under the same title, in a Court competent to try a such subsequent suit or the suit in which such issue has been subsequently raised, and has been heard and finally decided by such Court.’

Explanation I - The expression “former suit” shall denote a suit which has been decided prior to a suit in question whether or not it was instituted prior to it.

Explanation II - For the purposes of this section, the competence of a Court shall be determined irrespective of any provisions as to a right of appeal from the decision of such Court.

Explanation III - The matter above referred to must in the former suit have been alleged by one party and either denied or admitted, expressly or impliedly, by the other.

Explanation IV - Any matter which might and ought to have been made the ground of defence or attack in the such former suit shall be deemed to have been a matter directly and substantially in issue in such suit.

Explanation V - Any relief claimed in the plaint, which is not expressly granted by the decree, shall for the purposes of this section, be deemed to have been refused.

Explanation VI - Where persons litigate bona fide in respect of a public right or of a private right claimed in common for themselves and others, all persons interested in such right shall, for the purposes of this section, be deemed to claim under the persons so litigating.

Explanation VII - The provisions of this section shall apply to a proceeding for the execution of a decree and references in this section to any suit, issue or former suit shall be construed as references, respectively, to a proceeding for the execution of the decree, the question arising in such proceeding and a former proceeding for the execution of that decree.

Explanation VIII - 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 a such subsequent suit or the suit in which such issue has been subsequently raised.

Res judicata case law, In Satyadhyam Ghosal v/s Deorjin Debi & Anr, 1960, the doctrine of res judicata has been explained in detail view. In this case, the principle of res judicata is based on the need of giving finality to judicial decisions. What it says is that once a res is judicata, it shall not be adjudged again. Primarily it applies between past litigation and future litigation.

When a matter - whether on a question of fact or 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 Section 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure; but even where Section 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.”

Essential Elements of Doctrine of Res Judicata

Essential elements of doctrine of res-judicata are provided below;

Two Suits

There must be two suits for the application of the doctrine of res judicata, the doctrine is made applicable when the former suit is decided by the court after a full trial and the subsequent suit is pending before another court.

Same Parties

The former suit (previously decided suit) and subsequent (pending) suit must be between the same parties. That means, the litigants in the former suit which is previously decided by the court and the litigants in the subsequent suit which is pending in another court must be between the same parties or litigants.

Same Title

The matter or title which is directly or substantially in issue in both the suits i.e. previous suit and subsequent suit must be the same title or the issue directly and subsequently in issue in the subsequent suit should likewise be directly and substantially in issue in the former suit.

Decided by Competent Court

The doctrine of res judicata is applicable when the matter in issue in the former suit or previous suit must be fully tried and decided by the competent court of law. Whereas, if the previous suit was dismissed because the plaintiff failed to appear or technical defect/formal defect or on the ground of misjoinder of the parties etc, therefore, the doctrine of res judicata is not applicable here.

If the court decided the previous suit was not competent court and the subsequent suit if filed, therefore, the doctrine of res judicata is not applicable here as the previous suit was decided by the incompetent court.

Exceptions to Plea of Res-judicata

Exceptions to the plea of res judicata have been provided below;

Judgment in original suit obtained by fraud

When the court thinks that the judgment delivered in the former suit is obtained by the fraud, therefore, the doctrine of res judicata is not applicable.

When the previous suit is dismissed

When the suit is dismissed in default by the court without proper and complete adjudication or decision then the res judicata is not applicable, as the doctrine of res judicata is made applicable when the previous suit is fully adjudicated and decided on the merits of the case by the competent court.

Different cause of action

The doctrine of res judicata is not applicable when there is a different cause of action or different subject matter in the former suit and the subsequent suit. Therefore, the court cannot bar the subsequent suit in this situation.

When there is an interlocutory or interim order

The doctrine of res judicata is not applicable when there is an interim order or interlocutory order immediate relief is given to the parties and it can be altered by the subsequent application and there is no final decision of the suit, therefore, res judicata is not applicable on the interim orders passed by the court in the former suit.

Waiver of a Decree of Res Judicata

When the suit has been instituted against the defendant, it is the duty and responsibility of the defendant to see whether the doctrine of res judicata is applicable in this subsequent suit or not.

Whereas, if the opposing party (defendant) did not raise the issue of applicability of the doctrine of res judicata at an early stage as possible. Therefore, it is the duty of the defendant to make the court aware of the adjudication of the matter in the former suit. And, if the defendant fails to do so, the matter is decided against him.

When the court is not competent to decide

When the former suit fully proceeds and the judgment delivered by the court is not competent to decide that suit then the doctrine of res judicata is not applicable.

Therefore, the res judicata doctrine is not applicable when the suit is decided by the court which has no jurisdiction to try the suit.

When there is a change in law

Whenever there is a change in law emerges new laws and which brings new rights to the parties then such rights are not barred by this doctrine of res judicata.

Conclusion

Referred Books:

Legal Katta

Search Suggest