What is Res Judicata?
The term Res Judicata comes from Latin, meaning “a matter already judged.” Under this doctrine, once a final judgment has been passed by a competent court on a matter directly and substantially in issue, the same parties cannot raise the same issue again in a future lawsuit.
Legal Provision
The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) codifies this principle in Section 11, which clearly states that no court shall try any suit or issue which has been directly and substantially in issue in a former suit between the same parties, and where the issue has been heard and finally decided by a competent court.
Essential Elements of Res Judicata
For the doctrine to apply, the following conditions must be satisfied:
- Same Parties – The parties in both the previous and current suits must be the same or litigating under the same title.
- Same Matter in Issue – The issue in question must be directly and substantially the same as the one decided earlier.
- Previously Decided – The earlier suit must have been finally decided on its merits.
- Court of Competent Jurisdiction – The previous decision must have been given by a court with proper authority to try the matter.
- Final Judgment – There must be a conclusive and binding judgment.
Purpose and Importance
The Doctrine of Res Judicata serves three key purposes:
- Prevents Double Litigation – Once a dispute is settled, the law does not allow parties to file it again.
- Protects Judicial Time – It avoids repetitive suits, saving time and resources.
- Ensures Certainty in Law – It brings stability and finality to legal proceedings.
Exceptions to Res Judicata
While the doctrine is rigid, certain exceptions allow re-litigation under special circumstances:
- Fraud or Collusion – If the previous judgment was obtained by fraud, it does not bar a fresh suit.
- Lack of Jurisdiction – If the earlier court lacked jurisdiction, Res Judicata won’t apply.
- Change in Law or Circumstances – A significant change in law or facts may permit re-litigation.
- Public Interest Litigation (PIL) – Res Judicata applies differently in PIL cases due to wider public concerns.
Landmark Case Laws
1. Satyadhan Ghosal v. Deorajin Debi (1960 AIR 941)
The Supreme Court held that Res Judicata applies even to interlocutory orders and decisions in execution proceedings.
2. Daryao v. State of UP (AIR 1961 SC 1457)
This case extended Res Judicata to fundamental rights cases under Article 32, affirming that a dismissed writ under Article 226 bars a second petition on the same grounds.
3. Gulabchand Chhotalal Parikh v. State of Gujarat (AIR 1965 SC 1153)
The Supreme Court held that the doctrine also applies to civil suits against the State, thereby confirming its wider applicability.
Res Judicata vs. Estoppel
- Res Judicata bars the retrial of an issue already decided.
- Estoppel prevents a party from denying a fact they have previously affirmed.
Though both ensure consistency, they apply differently in legal practice.
