Appeal against dismissal of a suit claiming ownership based on a sale deed. The High Court held that third party objections under Order 21 Rule 101 CPC are treated as independent suits; failure in such objections bars a subsequent independent suit due to res judicata.
Application for condonation of delay allowed; Second appeal dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
RSA No.366 of 2016 (O&M)
-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
RSA No.366 of 2016 (O&M) Date of Decision.07.12.2018
Rakesh and others
....Appellants
Vs
Jagdish and others
...Respondents
CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL
Present: Ms. Bhanvi Sood, Advocate for Mr. Aditya Jain, Advocate for the appellants.
-.-
AMIT RAWAL J. (ORAL)
C.M. No.1118-C of 2016
For the reasons stated in the application, delay of 72 days in re-filing of the appeal is condoned.
Application is allowed.
RSA No.366 of 2016
The appellants-plaintiffs have not been successful in seeking declaration and injunction being owners on the basis of sale deed dated 21.10.2005.
Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that defendant No.1 and 2 at the back of the plaintiffs obtained a compromise decree dated 12.11.2005 whereby defendant No.1 had become the owner. The same was objected to by third party objections, which were unfortunately dismissed on 02.08.2008. Appeal preferred before the District Judge was also dismissed and as such independent suit was filed. The finding of fact and law holding the suit to be barred under Section 11 is not sustainable.
PANKAJ KUMAR 2018.12.17 17:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
RSA No.366 of 2016 (O&M)
-2-
I am afraid aforementioned argument is not sustainable, for, third party objections set up as per Order 21 Rule 101 CPC have to be treated as independent suit, particularly, when the appellantsplaintiffs have failed in those objections, thus, cannot be permitted to initiate subsequent proceedings by filing fresh suit. The findings of courts below in dismissing the suit on the doctrine akin to res judicata cannot be faulted. No ground for interference is made out, much less, no substantial question of law arises for determination by this Court.
Resultantly, the second appeal is dismissed.
(AMIT RAWAL) JUDGE
December 07, 2018 Pankaj* Whether Reasoned/Speaking Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No
PANKAJ KUMAR 2018.12.17 17:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a fresh suit can be filed after failure in third party objections under Order 21 Rule 101 CPC.
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Rakesh and others
Jagdish and others
Amit Rawal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
