Supreme Court Annual Digest 2024- Code Of Civil Procedure (CPC)

SUPREME COURT ANNUAL DIGEST 2024 - CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908Section 9 and Order 7 Rule 1 - Jurisdictional Fact and Maintainability of Suit - The issue of maintainability of a suit pertains to the jurisdiction of the trial court and strikes at the root of the proceedings under Order VII Rule 1, CPC. A suit barred by law renders the trial court incompetent to entertain it. Even if a case is not explicitly barred under Section 9, CPC, the trial court must ascertain whether jurisdictional facts exist to proceed with the trial and grant relief. This duty to ensure the existence of jurisdictional facts is fundamental and applies regardless of whether the parties raise the issue. The trial court must invite parties' attention to non-existent jurisdictional facts during issue settlement. Failure to do so, or an erroneous assumption of jurisdiction, leads to decisions deemed ultra vires and invalid. Higher courts, including the Supreme Court, possess the authority to review and rectify such jurisdictional lapses even when the trial court has not framed specific issues on maintainability or jurisdictional facts. R. Kandasamy v. T.R.K. Sarawathy, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 911 : AIR 2025 SC 44Section 11 – Bar of res judicata – Object of the principle of res judicata is to avoid parties to litigate on the same issue which has already been adjudicated upon and settled. The matter which is directly and substantially in issue in the previous litigation ought not to be permitted to be raised and adjudicated upon in the subsequent suit. Title and possession over the disputed land is claimed – Held, the judgment and order of the previous suit which is final and conclusive, in no specific terms adjudicates upon the right, title and interest of the suit land. The suit, was dismissed simpliciter without adjudication of any rights of the plaintiff-appellant over the suit land vis-à-vis the Cantonment Board. Hence, the principle of res judicata would not be attracted as the issue in the present suit was neither directly or indirectly in issue in the previous suit. The suit is not barred by res judicata. (Para 21, 23, 25) Har Narayan Tewari v. Cantonment Board, Ramgarh Cantonment, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 446 : (2024) 8 SCC 114Section 11 – Applicability of res judicata between co-defendants – It is a settled law that the principle of res judicata is applicable not only between the plaintiff and the defendants but also between the co-defendants. In applying the principle of res judicata between the co-defendants, primarily three conditions are necessary to be fulfilled, namely, (i) there must be a conflict of interest between the co-defendants; (ii) there is necessity to decide the said conflict in order to give relief to plaintiff; and (iii) there is final decision adjudicating the said conflict. Once all these conditions are satisfied, the principle of res judicata can be applied inter se the co-defendants. Held, there was no conflict of interest between the co-defendants in the earlier Suit. None of the above stated conditions between co-defendants stood fulfilled for applying res judicata. Hence, the principle of res judicata would not be attracted as the there was no conflict of interest between the co-defendants in the said previous suit which if any never came to be adjudicated upon. The suit is not barred under Section 11 CPC. (Para 23 & 25) Har Narayan Tewari v. Cantonment Board, Ramgarh Cantonment, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 446 : (2024) 8 SCC 114Section 11 – Res judicata, as a technical legal principle, operates to prevent the same parties from relitigating the same issues that have already been conclusively determined by a court. Held, the previous decision of this Court in the first round would not operate as res judicata to bar a decision on the lead matter and the other appeals, because this rule may not apply hard and fast in situations where larger public interest is at stake. In such cases, a more flexible approach ought to be adopted by courts, recognizing that certain matters transcend individual disputes and have far-reaching public interest implications. Hence, the applicability of res judicata is negated. (Para 23 & 25) Government of NCT of Delhi v. BSK Realtors LLP, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 420 : (2024) 7 SCC 370Section 13 – Bar of Res Judicata – Maintainability of suit challenged – Held, the suit is filed with a different set of facts and another set of litigants have raised additional contentions. Therefore, the writ petition should not be dismissed on the ground of res-judicata. (Para 23) Abhimeet Sinha v. High Court of Judicature at Patna, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 350 : AIR 2024 SC 2596Section 16 - Subject Matter Jurisdiction - Personal Obedience Principle - Specific Performance and Territorial Jurisdiction - Practical Impediments to Jurisdiction - Contractual Implications - The court reaffirms that under Section 16 CPC, suits concerning immovable property must generally be instituted in the court within whose territorial jurisdiction the ...

Supreme Court Annual Digest 2024- Code Of Civil Procedure (CPC)

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

Tags