Res Judicata Plea Cannot Be Decided Merely On Assertions Made In Application Seeking Rejection Of Plaint: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court held that a plea of Res judicata cannot be decided merely on assertions made in the application seeking rejection of the plaint and the objection of Res judicata cannot be taken to bar the suit under Order VII, Rule 11, CPC.

The Supreme Court considered an appeal filed against the decision of High Court of Madras allowing objection to the plaint under Order VII Rule 11 of the Civil Procedure Code on the ground of res judicata.

The Bench of Justice P S Narasimha and Justice Joymalya Bagchi observed, “Issue relating to whether the ex parte decree is obtained by collusion, or whether the defendant No. 1, as alleged, has played fraud by filing a suit in a court having no jurisdiction or whether the appellant is a bonafide purchaser or not need to be examined in detail. This Court has held that such circumstances require an in-depth examination of the previous decree, and its impact on the second suit. Res judicata cannot be decided merely on assertions made in the application seeking rejection of plaint. As held by this Court in V. Rajeshwari v. T.C. Saravanabava, identifying similarity in causes of action should be a matter for trial where documents from the first suit are studied and analysed. Res judicata cannot be a matter of speculation or inference.”

Case Brief

The Appellant had purchased the disputed property in 1998, who had in turn purchased it in 1991. The Appellant contends that while being in peaceful possession of the property, an advocate commissioner sought to inspect his property and came to know that Defendant No. 1 is claiming to be a co-owner of the said property and filed a suit for partition and also secured an ex parte decree in his favour. Resultantly, the Appellant t instituted the present suit for declaration of title and permanent injunction.

While the Defendant contended filed an application under Order VII, Rule 11 of CPC contending that the plaintiffs suit is barred by res judicata as the earlier ex parte decree has attained finality. The Appellant countered it by contending that he was not a party to the earlier suit and therefore the principle of res judicata would not apply.

Court’s Analysis

The Court referred to its own decision in Srihari Hanumandas Totala v. Hemant Vithal Kamat & Ors (2021) wherein it was held that the adjudication of the plea of res judicata is beyond the scope of Order VII, Rule 11 CPC.

The Court said, “While we clarify that we have not expressed any opinion on the question as to whether the ex parte decree in O.S. No. 298/96 dated 29.07.1997 would or would not operate as res judicata barring the present suit, we hold that enquiry into this question could not have been decided under Order VII, Rule 11 CPC, particularly in the context of the specific averments made by the appellant in the plaint about the ex parte decree, the circumstances surrounding the said transaction and the prayer in the suit for declaration and the consequential relief.”

Accordingly, the Supreme Court allowed the Appeal.

Cause Title: Pandurangan Vs. T. Jayarama Chettiar & Anr. (Neutral Citation:2025 INSC 825 )

Click here to read/download Judgment