SC Explains When Doctrine Of Res Judicata As Between Co-Defendants Can Be Applied [Read Judgment]
The Supreme Court has reiterated that the following four conditions are required to be satisfied while considering the applicability of the doctrine of res judicata as between co-defendants: There must be a conflict of interest between the defendants concerned; It must be necessary to decide the conflict in order to give the reliefs which the plaintiff claims; The question between the. The Supreme Court has reiterated that the following four conditions are required to be satisfied while considering the applicability of the doctrine of res judicata as between co-defendants: There must be a conflict of interest between the defendants concerned; It must be necessary to decide the conflict in order to give the reliefs which the plaintiff claims; The question between the defendants must have been finally decided; and The co-defendants were necessary or proper parties in the former suit. The requisite conditions to apply the principle of res judicata as between co-defendants are that there must be conflict of interest between the defendants concerned, it must be necessary to decide this conflict in order to give the plaintiff the relief he claims and the question between the defendants must have been finally decided. All the three requisite conditions are absent in the matter on hand.” The court referred to Privy Council decisions in this aspect and also the decision of the Supreme Court in Mahboob Sahab vs. Syed Ismail and Others, and said: “It is true that under Section 11 of the CPC, when the matter has been directly or substantially in issue in a former suit between the same parties or between parties under whom they or any of them claim, litigating under the same title, the decree in the former suit would operate as res judicata between the plaintiff and the defendant or as between the co-plaintiffs or co-defendants.
Discover Related

Munambam land dispute: Kerala HC stays single judge order quashing Ramachandran Nair Commission appointment

Malegaon blast: Judge transferred before verdict, victims' kin to challenge move

Supreme Court orders mandatory disclosure of criminal history in bail petitions

Lawyers bodies to abstain from swearing-in of Justice Sharma at Calcutta HC, may not attend his court

Supreme Court Weekly Round-up: March 17, 2025 To March 24, 2025

The judiciary’s ‘between a rock and hard place’ moment

In-house probe expedited, judge may depose today

‘Disgraceful’: MP high court reports lawyer’s outburst to chief justice Kait

SC Collegium Recommends Elevation Of Two Advocates As Judges Of Allahabad HC

Supreme Court stays Allahabad High Court’s ‘grabbing breasts not rape’ verdict; says it’s ‘insensitive, inhuman’

Three days in Indian courts: A tale of 'corruption', misogyny and privilege

CJI’s probe panel visits high court judge Yashwant Varma’s house

Judicial panel to begin inquiry in justice Varma case this week

Why justice Yashwant Varma had to move despite duties
