Order IX Rule 9 CPC-Decree Against Plaintiff By Default Bars Fresh Suit On Same Cause Of Action By Successor In Title: SC [Read Order]

The Supreme Court has observed that the decree against plaintiffs by default bars fresh suit on the same cause of action by their successor in title.The bench comprising Justice Arun Mishra and Justice MR Shah set aside a High Court order on the ground that in the previous suit filed by vendors of the plaintiff; a similar relief was prayed. The bench comprising Justice Arun Mishra and Justice MR Shah set aside a High Court order on the ground that in the previous suit filed by vendors of the plaintiff; a similar relief was prayed. These interesting questions of law were framed in the second appeal: When the plaintiff alone is precluded from bringing a fresh suit in respect of the same cause of action where his previous suit is dismissed for default under Order 9 Rule 9 of Civil Procedure Code, whether the subsequent suit filed by the successor-in-title of the plaintiff is maintainable? When the terminology used in Section 11 of the Civil Procedure Code bars a fresh suit between the same parties or between parties under whom they claim, litigating under the same title and when no such terminology is used in Order IX Rule 9 of the Civil Procedure Code, whether the first appellate Court is right in holding that the subsequent suit filed by the successor-in-title is not maintainable in view of the bar under Order 9 Rule 9?