Res Judicata Can't Be Matter Of Speculation Or Inference: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court has held that a plea of res judicata cannot be adjudicated under Order VII Rule 11 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908, as it requires a detailed inquiry and cannot be decided merely on the basis of assertions made in a preliminary application.

“Res judicata cannot be a matter of speculation or inference,” a bench of Justices P.S. Narasimha and Joymalya Bagchi said, while allowing an appeal filed by one Pandurangan against the Madras High Court’s 2019 decision rejecting his civil revision petition.

The Court observed that the Trial Court had erred in allowing the defendant’s application under Order VII Rule 11 CPC, which sought rejection of the plaint solely on the ground that the plaintiff’s suit was barred by res judicata due to an earlier ex parte decree passed in 1997.

The appellant had filed a suit in 2009 seeking a declaration of title and permanent injunction in respect of property purchased by him in 1998. He contended that the ex parte decree obtained by defendant No. 1 in a prior partition suit was fraudulent and collusive, and that he had no notice of the earlier litigation.

The bench noted that the appellant was not a party to the earlier suit, although his vendor was. The plaint contained specific averments that the earlier decree was obtained through fraud and misrepresentation, and that the subordinate court lacked territorial jurisdiction.

“These facts, including the plea that the earlier decree is collusive, cannot be brushed aside in an application under Order VII Rule 11 CPC,” the Court held.

Citing Srihari Hanumandas Totala v. Hemant Vithal Kamat (2021), the Court reiterated that adjudication of res judicata involves examining the issues, pleadings, and decisions of the previous suit, something that cannot be done at the threshold stage. It also referred to its recent ruling in Keshav Sood v. Kirti Pradeep Sood (2023), which emphasized that such objections must be tried in regular proceedings, not dismissed summarily.

The Court found that both the Trial Court and the High Court had failed to consider the specific allegations raised by the appellant and had wrongly rejected the suit at the preliminary stage.

Accordingly, it set aside the Madras High Court’s order dated March 20, 2019, and directed restoration of the suit before the District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate, Portonovo, with directions for expeditious disposal, considering the pendency since 2009.

The bench clarified it had not expressed any opinion on the merits, and all contentions, including those relating to res judicata, are left open for final determination.

Case Title: Pandurangan vs T. Jayarama Chettiar & Anr

Judgment Date: July 14, 2025

Bench: Justice P.S. Narasimha and Justice Joymalya Bagchi