Introduction

• The doctrine of Res Judicata is a fundamental principle in civil litigation, which prevents multiple lawsuits on the same issue between the same parties.

• It is based on the maxim “Nemo debet bis vexari pro una et eadem causa”, meaning “No person should be vexed twice for the same cause”.

• The doctrine aims to provide finality to judicial decisions and avoid contradictory rulings.

Legal Basis

• Section 11 of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC), 1908 codifies the doctrine.

• Also recognized under Article 141 of the Constitution (decisions of the Supreme Court are binding).

Essentials of Res Judicata

For Res Judicata to apply, the following conditions must be fulfilled:

1. Same matter in issue – The issue must have been directly and substantially in issue in the previous case.

2. Same parties – The parties (or their representatives) in both suits must be the same.

3. Same title and capacity – The previous and subsequent suits must be between the same parties in the same legal capacity.

4. Final decision by a competent court – The earlier decision must be final and pronounced by a court having jurisdiction.

5. Matter directly adjudicated – The issue must have been decided, not merely argued or incidental.

6. Same cause of action – The cause of action in both suits must be identical.

Purpose and Objectives

• Prevents multiplicity of litigation.

• Ensures judicial efficiency.

• Protects public interest by avoiding inconsistent judgments.

• Promotes legal certainty.

Types of Res Judicata

1. Actual Res Judicata – When an issue has been directly decided in a previous case.

2. Constructive Res Judicata – If a party could have raised an issue in the first suit but failed to do so, they cannot raise it in a subsequent suit.

3. Res Judicata between Co-defendants – If an issue is decided between co-defendants in an earlier case, it cannot be re-litigated.

4. Res Judicata between Co-plaintiffs – If co-plaintiffs had an issue decided in an earlier case, they cannot raise it again.

5. Foreign Judgment and Res Judicata – A foreign judgment is binding unless it is contrary to public policy or obtained by fraud.

Leading Case Laws

1. Daryao v. State of U.P. – SC ruled that Res Judicata applies to writ petitions under Article 32 and 226.

2. Satyadhyan Ghosal v. Deorajin Debi – Clarified the importance of Res Judicata in judicial administration.

3. Hope Plantations Ltd. v. Taluk Land Board – Reaffirmed that Res Judicata is based on public policy.

4. Lal Chand v. Radha Kishan – SC held that constructive Res Judicata applies when a party fails to raise an issue in the first suit.

Exceptions to Res Judicata

• Fraud and Collusion – If the previous judgment was obtained by fraud, Res Judicata does not apply.

• Lack of Jurisdiction – If the earlier court lacked jurisdiction, the decision is not binding.

• Violation of Fundamental Rights – If a previous judgment violates fundamental rights, courts can re-examine the issue.

• Change in Law – If there is a substantial change in law after the first decision.

• Matters of Public Interest – Cases involving constitutional issues, election matters, or other issues affecting public interest.

Difference Between Res Judicata and Estoppel

Basis	Res Judicata	Estoppel
Definition	Prevents re-litigation of the same issue between the same parties.	Prevents a party from contradicting their previous statement or conduct.
Scope	Covers entire litigation process.	Applies to statements, conduct, and representations.
Legal Provision	Section 11 of CPC	Section 121 of Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023.
Effect	Prevents a case from being reopened.	Prevents a party from going against their previous position.

• Res Judicata is essential to maintain the integrity of the judicial system.

• It ensures finality of decisions, prevents abuse of process, and upholds judicial consistency.

• However, it is subject to exceptions where justice demands reconsideration.