appeal before the IIIrd Additional District Judge, Jagdalpur, C.G. The first appellate Court allowed the appeal setting aside the judgment and decree passed by the trial Court; against which Ransi and others had preferred second appeal before the High Court. This Court vide order dated 20-07-2011 passed in Second Appeal No.125/2011 dismissed the second appeal and held that no any substantial question of law is attracted for the hearing of the appeal on its merit. Thus, as the order passed, findings and the judgment and decree passed by the first appellate Court was affirmed, the same attains finality till the moment. In the proceeding before the trial Court, Sonu stood as witness for his elder brother Boga, hence he had knowledge for the pendency of the said suit No.23A/06, also Boga who had filed the written statement he also mentioned the name of his two other brothers, i.e., Sonu and Aayatu, hence, if Sonu and Aayatu wished they were having opportunity to file an application under Order 1 Rule 10 of the CPC and they may be impleaded as party. It is submitted that with this, Sonu and Aayatu had not filed any application for impleading them as party in that suit thereby though they were not party to that suit, the said knowledge of the proceeding of that civil suit operates as res judicata for the subsequent Civil Suit No.12A/14 filed by respondents 1 and 2 before the Vth Civil Judge Class-II, Bastar at Jagdalpur. Learned counsel submits that as the findings of this Court in Second Appeal No.125/2011 remains unchallenged, the said is res judicata for hearing of Civil Suit No.12A/14. Learned counsel further submits that as the Sonu was a witness in Civil Suit No.23A/06, he had knowledge for the litigation and as the present respondents 1 and 2 they were living jointly along with elder brother Boga, hence, by living together they had knowledge for the aforementioned civil suit and the dispute, therefore Civil Suit No.12A/14 is also barred by limitation. Learned counsel for the applicants placed reliance in the matter of Damodar Prasad and another Vs. State of M.P.and others1 . Learned counsel further submits that in the case law cited it
