Res judicata cannot be determined as a preliminary issue if it involves questions of fact: Supreme Court [Read Judgment]

The judgment further lays down the ingredients to determine res judicata and a twin test to ascertain if the issues have been decided in a previous suit.

The Supreme Court has held that the issue of res judicata cannot be decided as a preliminary issue when there is a mixed question of facts and law or a question of law that requires trial.

The bench comprising Justice Chandrachud, Vikram Nath and Hima Kohli further held that a suit under Section 92 of of Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) is representative in nature and all persons interested in the trust would be bound by the decision of the suit and hence, principle of res judicata will apply to them on institution of a subsequent suit.

The judgment has noted that since a compromise decree is not the judgment of a court, a subsequent suit will not be barred on the principles of res judicata, however, it bars the institution of a subsequent suit on the principle of estoppel by conduct.

The judgment laid down a twin test in order to ascertain whether a previous suit has conclusively decided the issue, the court held as follows

1. Whether the adjudication of the issue was ‘necessary’ for deciding on the principle issue (‘the necessity test’); and
2. Whether the judgment in the suit is based upon the decision on that issue (‘the essentiality test’).

The judgment laid down ingredients that need to be fulfilled in order to attract res judicata

1. The matter must have been directly and substantially in issue in the former suit;
2. The matter must be heard and finally decided by the Court in the former suit;
3. The former suit must be between the same parties or between parties under whom they or any of them claim, litigating under the same title; and
4. The Court in which the former suit was instituted is competent to try the subsequent suit or the suit in which such issue has been subsequently raised.

The judgment further adjudicates that in a representative suit filed under section 92 of CPC, while deciding the scheme of administration of a property of which the title is under dispute, the court will have to determine whether the property belongs to the trust.

The above mentioned principles were held in a case titled Jama Masjid Vs Rudrappa & Ors where the masjid filed a suit seeking declaration that the State Wakf Board is the owner of the property in dispute. The respondents in the SLP in the written statement before the trial court contended that the suit is barred by res judicata as the issues so contended were decided in a previous suit.

The trial court after considering the issue of res judicata as the preliminary issue, held that the suit in hand was barred by the principle of res judicata as the issues contested had been decided in the previous suit. The court of first appeal and the High Court upheld the order of the trial court.

The petitioner thus contended before the Supreme Court that the issue of res judicata cannot be decided as a preliminary issue unless evidence is adduced and the trial is completed.

Case Title: The Jamia Masjid Vs. Sri K V Rudrappa (Since Dead) By Lrs. & Ors

Access Copy of Judgment Here