Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)

Section: 115 , 35 , 1

  Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)- ---(. 11, Explanation IV & 0.11, R.2 & S.115---Constructive res judicata, principle of---Applicability---Test---For applying bar of res judicata, test was whether the reliefs now being claimed were available to the party at the time of institution of first suit and whether same could have been asked for in that suit, because by force of doctrine of constructive res judicata, the party was bound to have brought his whole claim to the Court, to have urged all the grounds, in such party's support available to it and to have sought all the reliefs, available at that time-- Principle of constructive res judicata would bar the trial in subsequent suit of all the matters which might and ought to have been alleged---Constructive res judicata would make a decision final not only to the matters actually determined in the decision but also to the other matters which might and ought to have been agitated and could have been resolved in that decision---Reliefs included in the subsequent suit were based on the same cause of action which prompted the plaintiff to institute the former suit and such reliefs, being available at the time of filing of earlier suit, could have been based on the same cause of action, but a second suit could not legally be sustained on the same cause of action even for reliefs, not claimed in the first suit---Principle of constructive res judicata precluded piecemeal litigation and hardships and inconveniences resulting from repeated litigation on the same cause of action were checked---Provisions of 0.11, R.1 required the plaintiff to have framed his earlier suit in a manner which should have helped final adjudication of the subject in dispute and the entire claim to which a suit or was entitled would have to be included in the suit and omission to do so would preclude such left over claim to form subject-matter of second suit --Provisions of constructive res judicata would thus debar a plaintiff to file suit on the basis of same cause of action although on different grounds or for different reliefs and he was precluded to include the left over claim in subsequent suit-- Courts below had thus…