Order 6 CPC – Pleadings (Complete Guide with Rules, Cases & Amendments Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) lays down detailed rules regarding pleadings under Order VI. Pleadings form the backbone of any civil suit, as they define the scope of the dispute, inform each party about the case of the other, and help the court in determining the issues. In this article, we will cover: • Meaning of pleadings • Objects and importance • Rules of pleadings under Order 6 CPC • Amendment of pleadings (Order 6 Rule 17) • Important case laws and exam-oriented points What is Pleading? (Order 6 Rule 1 CPC) According to CPC, pleadings mean plaint or written statement. • Plaint → Filed by the plaintiff stating his cause of action. • Written Statement → Filed by the defendant stating his defence. Extended pleadings may also include: • Counterclaim (Order 8 Rule 6A CPC) • Set-off (Order 8 Rule 6 CPC) • Replication → Plaintiff’s reply to WS (with court’s permission) • Rejoinder → Defendant’s reply to replication (rare; requires permission) Object of Pleadings The Supreme Court in Ganesh Trading Co. v. Moji Ram, AIR 1978 SC explained the objectives of pleadings: 1. To give notice of each party’s case to the other. 2. To avoid surprises during trial. 3. To help the court determine real issues in dispute. 4. To save time, expenses, and avoid unnecessary delays. ✓ Rules of Pleadings (Order 6 Rule 2 CPC) Pleadings must comply with the following principles: 1. Facts, not law – Parties must state only material facts, not legal principles. 2. Material facts only – Only those facts on which the claim or defence rests. 3. No evidence in pleadings – Evidence should not be included. (Case: Virendra Nath v. Satpal Singh, 2007 SC) • Facta Probanda = Facts required to be proved → Must be pleaded. • Facta Probantia = Evidence to prove facts → Should not be pleaded. 4. Concise form – Pleadings should be brief and precise. 5. Paragraphs and numbers – Allegations must be divided into consecutively numbered paragraphs. 6. Dates and sums – To be mentioned in both words and figures. ✓ Particulars in Special Cases (Order 6 Rule 4 CPC) • In cases of fraud, misrepresentation, undue influence, breach of trust, or willful default, full particulars must be stated. • Example: Simply saying “B committed fraud” is not enough → Details must be given. • Raja Ram v. Jai Prakash Singh (2019 SC): In fraud and undue influence, specific particulars are mandatory. Other Important Rules of Pleadings • Order 6 Rule 6 – Condition precedent: If a condition precedent is disputed, it must be specifically pleaded. Otherwise, court presumes it fulfilled. • Order 6 Rule 7 – No departure: No party can introduce inconsistent pleadings unless amended. • Order 6 Rule 8 – Denial of contract: Mere denial means denial of fact, not legality. • Order 6 Rule 9 – Effect of document: Only mention the effect, not entire contents. • Order 6 Rule 10 – Malice, fraud, knowledge: It’s enough to state them as facts. • Order 6 Rule 11 – Notice: Only allege notice was given unless its terms are material. • Order 6 Rule 14 – Signing: Must be signed by party & lawyer. • Order 6 Rule 15 – Verification: Verification at foot of pleading with affidavit. Amendment of Pleadings (Order 6 Rule 17 CPC) The court may allow either party to alter or amend pleadings at any stage, provided: • The amendment is necessary to decide the real dispute. • It does not cause injustice to the opposite party. Proviso (2002 Amendment) No amendment after commencement of trial unless despite due diligence, it could not be raised earlier. When Allowed • To avoid multiplicity of suits. • To correct mistake in parties’ names. • To add omitted properties by mistake. • Clarifications in cause of action. • New facts due to changed circumstances. When Refused • When amendment changes entire nature of the suit. • When it takes away a legal right (e.g., limitation). • When sought in bad faith. (Andhra Bank v. ABN AMRO, 2007 SC) • When inconsistent or destructive of earlier pleadings. (Usha Balasaheb Swamy v. Kiran Appaso Swamy, 2007 SC) Doctrine of Relation Back Amendments generally relate back to the date of original pleading, but courts have discretion. Striking Out Pleadings (Order 6 Rule 16 CPC) Court may strike out pleadings if: 1. They are unnecessary, scandalous, frivolous or vexatious. 2. They prejudice or delay fair trial. 3. They are abuse of court process. Case Laws on Pleadings • Ganesh Trading Co. v. Moji Ram (1978 SC) – Object of pleadings. • Virendra Nath v. Satpal Singh (2007 SC) – Facta Probanda vs Facta Probantia. • Raja Ram v. Jai Prakash Singh (2019 SC) – Fraud and undue influence must be pleaded with particulars. • Kisandas v. Rachappa Vithoba (1909 Bom) – Test for amendment. • Usha Balasaheb Swamy v. Kiran Appaso Swamy (2007 SC) – Inconsistent amendments not allowed. FAQs on Order 6 CPC Q1. What are pleadings under CPC? Pleadings mean plaint and written statement (Order 6 Rule 1). Q2. Can pleadings include evidence? No, pleadings must contain only material facts, not evidence. Q3. Can pleadings be amended? Yes, under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC, with court’s permission, subject to conditions. Q4. What happens if pleadings contain scandalous or frivolous matter? Court may strike them out under Order 6 Rule 16. Q5. Is amendment allowed after trial begins? Only if party proves that despite due diligence, it could not have been raised earlier. Conclusion Order 6 CPC lays down detailed rules regarding pleadings, ensuring clarity, fairness, and efficiency in civil proceedings. Parties must strictly follow these principles, as courts decide cases based on pleadings and not on arguments outside them. Understanding Order 6 CPC (Pleadings) is crucial for law students, civil lawyers, and judiciary aspirants, as it is one of the most frequently tested topics in exams and forms the…
Author: toahostinger
Summons under CPC:- Meaning, Essentials, Types, and Service of Summons Summons form the foundation of natural justice in civil procedure. Under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC), a defendant must be informed about the legal proceedings filed against him. This intimation, known as a summons, ensures that no person is condemned unheard in line with the principle of audi alteram partem. If a defendant is not duly served with summons, any decree passed against him will not bind him. Therefore, proper issue and service of summons are crucial in civil proceedings. ∆ Meaning of Summons When a plaintiff files a suit, the court issues a notice to the defendant informing him: • That a suit has been filed against him, and • That he is required to appear before the court to defend himself. This notice is called a summons. It is not just a formality but a legal requirement to ensure fairness. Legal Provisions Related to Summons • Section 27 CPC – Issue of summons within 30 days of filing the suit. • Section 28 CPC – Service of summons in another State. • Section 29 CPC – Service of foreign summons in India. • Section 30 CPC – Powers of the court to issue summons, order documents, or affidavits. • Section 32 CPC – Consequences of ignoring summons (arrest, property attachment, fine, or civil prison). Additionally: • Order 5 CPC – Summons to defendants. • Order 16 CPC – Summons to witnesses. ✓ Essentials of a Valid Summons (Order 5 Rules 1–2) 1. Must be signed by the Judge or authorised officer. 2. Must bear the seal of the Court. 3. Must be accompanied by a copy of the plaint. 4. Must be in the prescribed form under Appendix B of CPC. Types of Summons under CPC Under Order 5 CPC, summons may be issued for different purposes: 1. Summons for Settlement of Issues • Order 5 Rule 1(1) • Defendant is called to file a written statement and submit supporting documents. 2. Summons for Final Disposal of Suit • Order 5 Rule 5 • Defendant must appear prepared with witnesses and evidence for final hearing. 3. Summons for Personal Appearance Only • Order 5 Rule 3 • Defendant must appear personally if ordered by the Court. ✓ Service of Summons (Order 5 Rules 9–30) 1. Service through Court [Rule 9] • By court officer, registered post, courier, email, or other communication methods. • Refusal of summons = deemed valid service. 2. Service by Plaintiff (Dasti Summons) [Rule 9-A] • Court may allow plaintiff to serve summons personally. 3. Personal/Direct Service [Rules 10–16, 18] • Served to the defendant, his agent, or adult family member (not servant). • Must be acknowledged by the recipient. 4. Substituted Service [Rules 17, 19–20] When defendant avoids service or cannot be located: • By affixing notice on the outer door of his house. • By publishing in a local daily newspaper. • By pasting in a conspicuous place in the court. • Substituted service = as effective as personal service. 5. Service by Post • If sent by registered post to the correct address, it is deemed valid even without acknowledgment. 6. Special Situations • Defendant outside India → Service by post, courier, fax, or email (Order 5 Rule 25). • Defendant in jail → Summons to be served on the officer in charge of prison (Order 5 Rule 29). Case Laws on Service of Summons • State of J & K v. H. W. Mohammed, AIR 1972 SC 2538 – Proper compliance with Order 5 Rule 19 is necessary for valid service. • Basant Singh v. Roman Catholic Mission, AIR 2002 SC 3557 – Substituted service through widely circulated newspaper is valid even if not the exact paper ordered. • Sunil Poddar v. Union Bank of India (2008) 2 SCC 326 – Service by advertisement in newspaper is effective even if defendant does not read that newspaper. • Prabhin Ram Pukhan v. State of Assam, (2015) 3 SCC 605 – Irregularity in summons is not fatal unless substantial prejudice is caused. Consequences of Non-Appearance after Summons Under Section 32 CPC, if a person ignores a valid summons, the Court may: • Issue a warrant of arrest, • Attach and sell his property, • Impose a fine up to ₹5,000, • Demand security for appearance, or • Commit him to civil prison. ∆ Key Takeaways • Summons ensure fair hearing and natural justice. • Must be properly issued and served under CPC rules. • Various modes of service exist, including personal, postal, electronic, and substituted service. • Non-compliance with summons can attract serious consequences. Conclusion Summons under CPC play a vital role in safeguarding the principles of justice, equity, and fair trial. Without proper service of summons, civil proceedings cannot move forward. Therefore, both litigants and courts must ensure that summons are issued, served, and acknowledged in accordance with law. ✓ To start your preparation for Judicial Services Examination at home, drop a message on WhatsApp +91 8840961324 or call us on +91 9151591324 At Theory of Abrogation, we equip you with everything you need: •Subject-wise expert classes •Mock test series •Legal current affairs •Personalized mentorship for interview preparation “Your law degree is your foundation, but your preparation is what will build your success.” Join Our New Batch Now! Prepare smart. Prepare with Theory of Abrogation. Contact Us: B-109, Commercial Complex Dr. Mukherjee Nagar, Delhi-09 +91 9971399324 | +91 8840961324 [email protected]
Order 2 CPC – Frame of Suit: Meaning, Rules, Case Laws & Illustrations The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) lays down detailed rules for filing civil suits in India. Order 2 CPC deals with the “Frame of Suit” and ensures that a plaintiff includes the whole of his claim in one suit to prevent multiple litigations on the same cause of action. This article provides a comprehensive explanation of Order 2 CPC, including its objectives, rules, illustrations, case laws, and practical examples. Objectives of Order 2 CPC The main purpose of Order 2 CPC is to: • Prevent multiplicity of proceedings. • Avoid harassment of the defendant. • Save time of the court. • Reduce unnecessary expenses in litigation. 1. Frame of Suit (Rule 1) Every suit must be framed in such a way that: • It allows the court to reach a final decision on the dispute. • It prevents future litigation on the same issues. 2. Suit to Include the Whole Claim (Order 2 Rule 2 CPC) (1) Whole Claim A plaintiff must include the entire claim arising from a cause of action. However, he may relinquish part of the claim to bring the suit within the jurisdiction of a lower court. (2) Relinquishment of Claim If the plaintiff omits or intentionally relinquishes a portion of the claim, he cannot file a fresh suit for the same later. (3) Omission of Reliefs If a plaintiff is entitled to multiple reliefs from the same cause of action, he must claim all of them together. If he omits one without the leave of court, he is barred from suing for it later. Explanation: An obligation and its collateral security, or successive claims under the same obligation, are treated as one cause of action. Illustrations under Order 2 Rule 2 CPC 1. If rent of three years is due but plaintiff sues only for one year → He cannot later sue for the remaining years. 2. If a loan is ₹2200 but plaintiff sues for ₹2000 to stay within jurisdiction → He cannot later sue for ₹200. 3. If a defendant has a right of set-off but does not use it fully → He cannot file a fresh suit for the balance. 4. A suit dismissed on one ground does not always bar another suit based on a different cause of action (e.g., redemption of mortgage after eviction case). Meaning of “Cause of Action” • Refers to essential facts giving the plaintiff the right to sue. • Example: Sale of goods + non-payment = cause of action. • Same cause of action → bar applies. • Different cause of action → bar does not apply. Case Laws on Order 2 Rule 2 CPC • Gurbux Singh v. Bhooralal (1964 SC): Rule is penal in nature and must be applied strictly. • Arjun Lal v. Mriganka Mohan (1975 SC): Rule applies only if both suits are based on the same cause of action. • Union of India v. Firm Baijnath Govind Das (1955 ALJ 597): One contract with two breaches → only one suit will lie. • Deva Ram v. Ishwar Chand (1996 SC): Different causes of action (recovery of sale price vs possession of land) → fresh suit is allowed. Splitting Claim vs Splitting Relief • Splitting Claim: First suit for part payment, second suit for balance → Bar applies. • Splitting Relief: First suit for specific performance, second suit for damages (without leave) → Bar applies. • Different Cause of Action: First suit for rent, second for eviction based on ownership → No bar. 3. Joinder of Causes of Action (Order 2 Rules 3–6) Rule 3 – Joinder Permitted A plaintiff may join multiple causes of action in one suit, subject to CPC provisions. Types of Joinder: 1. One Plaintiff vs One Defendant – Multiple claims (e.g., loan recovery, rent, breach of contract). 2. Multiple Plaintiffs & Causes of Action – Allowed if: • Claims arise from same transaction, and • Common questions of law/fact exist. 3. One Plaintiff vs Multiple Defendants – Allowed if: • Based on same transaction, and • Common questions of law/fact exist. Otherwise, it is misjoinder or multifariousness. 4. Multiple Plaintiffs vs Multiple Defendants – Allowed only if all are jointly interested. Rule 6 – Court’s Discretion The court may separate trials if joinder causes confusion, delay, or inconvenience. 4. Rule 4 – Certain Claims with Immovable Property Claims for possession of immovable property may be joined with: • Mesne profits / arrears of rent. • Damages for breach of contract. • Any claim arising from the same cause of action. Special Note: In mortgage suits, possession may also be claimed. 5. Rule 7 – Objections on Misjoinder • Objections must be raised at the earliest stage. • Otherwise, they are deemed waived. • Misjoinder not affecting merits or jurisdiction cannot be a ground for reversal of decree. Applicability • Order 2 CPC applies only to civil suits. • It does not apply to appeals, execution proceedings, arbitration, or writ petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution. Conclusion Order 2 CPC plays a crucial role in civil litigation by ensuring that all claims and reliefs arising from the same cause of action are included in one suit. It prevents splitting of claims, saves judicial time, and protects defendants from repeated harassment. However, the rule is penal in nature and must be applied strictly, as held in various Supreme Court judgments. ✓ For law students and judiciary aspirants, Order 2 CPC (Frame of Suit) is an important topic, especially in understanding the concept of cause of action, splitting of claims, and joinder of causes of action. To start your preparation for Judicial Services Examination at home, drop a message on WhatsApp +91 8840961324 or call us on +91 9151591324 At Theory of Abrogation, we equip you with everything you need: •Subject-wise expert classes •Mock test series •Legal current affairs •Personalized mentorship for interview preparation “Your law degree is your foundation, but your preparation is…
Order 1 CPC – Parties to Suit: Joinder, Non-Joinder, and Representative Suits Order 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), 1908 deals with the rules regarding parties to a suit. It lays down who can be joined as plaintiffs or defendants, when parties must be added, and how the court ensures effective adjudication. The objective is to avoid multiplicity of proceedings, reduce expenses, and make sure all necessary parties are present before the court. Joinder of Parties under Order 1 CPC The concept of joinder of parties arises when: • An act is done by two or more persons together, or • An act affects two or more persons together. There are two kinds of joinder under Order 1 CPC: 1. Joinder of Plaintiffs (Order 1 Rule 1) All persons may be joined as plaintiffs if: • Their right to relief arises out of the same act or transaction (whether jointly, severally, or in the alternative), and • If they filed separate suits, common questions of law or fact would arise. Example: If A assaults B and C in the same incident, both B and C can join as plaintiffs in one suit. Counter Example: If A has four separate contracts with B, C, D, and E, they cannot jointly sue A, because each has a separate cause of action. 2. Joinder of Defendants (Order 1 Rule 3) Multiple persons can be joined as defendants if: • The right to relief arises out of the same act or transaction, and • Common questions of law or fact would arise if separate suits were filed. Example: If A suffers injury due to the negligence of both a bus driver (B) and a car driver (C), A can sue both together in one suit. Moreover, under Order 1 Rule 7, if the plaintiff is unsure who is liable, he can sue multiple defendants in the alternative and leave the decision to the court. Power of Court to Order Separate Trials Even if conditions for joinder are satisfied, the court may order separate trials under: • Order 1 Rule 2 – for plaintiffs (court may ask them to make an “election” who continues in the suit). • Order 1 Rule 3A – for defendants (court may separate trials, but defendants cannot “opt out” themselves). This ensures that joinder does not cause embarrassment, confusion, or delay in proceedings. Necessary and Proper Parties Order 1 CPC distinguishes between: • Necessary Party → Without whom no effective decree can be passed. • Proper Party → Whose presence is not essential but is helpful for complete adjudication. In Ramesh Hirachand Kundanmal v. Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay (1992), the Supreme Court held that two conditions must exist for a necessary party: 1. There must be a right to relief against such party, and 2. No effective order can be passed without him. Example: In a dispossession case against C, if A and B are joint owners, both must be parties. Without B, the decree would be ineffective. Non-Joinder and Misjoinder of Parties • Non-joinder → Failure to include a necessary or proper party. • Misjoinder → Inclusion of a party who does not satisfy the requirements of Order 1 Rule 1 or 3. ✓ According to Order 1 Rule 9, a suit will not be defeated merely due to misjoinder or non-joinder, except when a necessary party is not joined. • Order 1 Rule 13 mandates objections be raised at the earliest stage. • Section 99 CPC prevents reversal of decrees on appeal due to misjoinder/non-joinder, except in the case of a necessary party. Thus, non-joinder of a necessary party is fatal, but misjoinder or non-joinder of proper parties does not affect the decree. Addition, Substitution, and Transposition of Parties (Order 1 Rule 10 CPC) The court has wide powers under Order 1 Rule 10 to add, strike out, substitute, or transpose parties at any stage of the proceedings, including the appellate stage. • Substitution: If the wrong person has been made plaintiff by mistake. • Addition: If a necessary party is missing. • Transposition: A pro forma defendant can be shifted as a plaintiff if justice requires. In Razia Begum v. Sahebzadi Anwar Begum (1958), the Supreme Court held that substitution or addition may be allowed at any stage if it is necessary for the complete adjudication of the dispute. Representative Suits under Order 1 Rule 8 CPC A representative suit allows one or more persons to sue or defend on behalf of a larger group having the same interest in the matter. The conditions are: 1. The parties must be numerous. 2. They must have the same interest. 3. Court’s permission is necessary. 4. Notice must be issued to all persons being represented. The purpose is to avoid multiplicity of proceedings and ensure effective adjudication. In T.N. Housing Board v. T.N. Ganapathy (1990), the Supreme Court held that even if each allottee received a separate notice, a representative suit was valid since the grievance (excess demand) was common to all. • Binding Effect: The decision binds all represented persons through res judicata. • Withdrawal/Compromise: Cannot be done without court’s permission and notice to all concerned (Order 23 Rule 3B). • Substitution: If a representative is negligent, the court may substitute him with another member of the same group. Conclusion Order 1 CPC plays a crucial role in civil litigation by determining who should or may be made a party to the suit. It ensures that necessary parties are included, prevents unnecessary multiplicity of suits, and provides for representative actions where large groups are affected by the same issue. Provisions relating to non-joinder, misjoinder, and representative suits strike a balance between judicial efficiency and fairness. By giving the court wide discretion in adding or removing parties, Order 1 strengthens the justice delivery system and ensures that disputes are adjudicated completely and effectively. ✓ To start your preparation for Judicial Services Examination at home, drop a message on WhatsApp +91 8840961324 or call us on…
Transfer of Cases under CPC (Sections 22–25) Introduction As a general rule, in civil litigation the plaintiff is dominus litis (master of the suit) and enjoys the right to choose the forum where the suit will be instituted, provided that multiple courts have jurisdiction. Normally, this choice is respected and not interfered with. However, to balance fairness, the CPC (Sections 22–25) empowers defendants, High Courts, and the Supreme Court to transfer cases in appropriate circumstances. These provisions are exhaustive and act as safeguards to ensure fair trial, convenience, and justice. Section 22 & 23: Transfer on Defendant’s Application Who Can Apply? • Only the defendant (not the plaintiff). When Can Defendant Apply? • Where the plaintiff had a choice of filing in two or more courts, but chose one. • The defendant may seek transfer to another competent court. Conditions: 1. Defendant must give notice to plaintiff and other parties (mandatory). 2. Application must be filed at the earliest stage, before settlement of issues. 3. The court must hear objections before deciding. Where to File Transfer Application? (Sec. 23) 1. If both courts are subordinate to the same appellate court → Application lies to that Appellate Court (District Judge). 2. If courts are under different appellate courts but same High Court → Application lies to the High Court. 3. If courts are under different High Courts (different States) → Application lies to the High Court within whose jurisdiction the suit was filed. Section 24: General Power of High Court & District Court Who Can Apply? • Any party (plaintiff/defendant), OR • The Court suo motu (on its own). When? • At any stage of the case. Powers of High Court/District Court under Section 24: 1. Transfer a case from one subordinate court to another. 2. Withdraw a case from a subordinate court and: • Try it themselves, or • Send it to another subordinate court, or • Re-transfer to the original court. Scope of Section 24: • Applies to any suit, appeal, or proceeding, including execution cases. • Can transfer cases even from a court without jurisdiction. • If a Small Causes Court case is transferred, the transferee court will act as a Small Causes Court. Case Law: • Durgesh Sharma v. Jayshree (2008 SC) → High Court cannot transfer a case to a court not subordinate to it. Section 25: Power of Supreme Court to Transfer Who Can Apply? • Any party to the case. Scope: • Supreme Court can transfer any suit, appeal, or proceeding from one High Court/civil court in one State to another High Court/civil court in another State. • Grounds: Expedient in the interest of justice (fair trial, convenience, avoiding conflicting judgments). Process: • Formal application + supporting affidavit must be filed before the Supreme Court. Effect of Transfer: • The new court may: 1. Start the case afresh, or 2. Continue from the stage left by previous court (as directed by SC). Case Law: • Shakuntala Modi v. Om Prakash Bharoka (1991 SC) → Husband filed divorce in Bombay, wife filed maintenance in Guwahati. SC transferred the divorce case to Guwahati for convenience and to avoid conflicting decisions. Judicial Principles on Transfer of Cases Balancing Interests: 1. Plaintiff’s Right → To choose the forum. 2. Defendant’s Right → To fair and impartial trial. Courts must carefully balance both and transfer cases only when truly necessary. Key Supreme Court Observations & Case Laws 1. Arvee Industries v. Ratan Lal (1977 SC) • Plaintiff’s choice should not be disturbed lightly. • Burden of proof lies on party seeking transfer. 2. Maneka Gandhi v. Rani Jethmalani (1979 SC) • Famous principle: “Fair trial is the paramount consideration.” • Transfer only when justice is genuinely threatened (bias, safety threats, public hostility). 3. T.V. Eachara Warrier v. State of Kerala (1985) • Mere inconvenience, vague allegations, or delay in filing transfer → Not enough. 4. Indian Overseas Bank v. Chemical Construction Co. (1979 SC) • Court considers balance of convenience (for parties, witnesses, and smooth trial). • “Forum conveniens” principle applied. 5. Subramaniam Swamy v. Ramakrishna Hegde (1990 SC) • Even if the transferee court lacks territorial jurisdiction, case can be transferred if justice requires. 6. Kulwinder Kaur v. Kandi Friends Education Trust (2008 SC) • Court must avoid discussing merits while transferring. • Reasons must be recorded. ✓ Grounds for Transfer of Suits Sufficient Grounds 1. To avoid multiplicity of proceedings/conflicting judgments (Indian Overseas Bank case). 2. Reasonable apprehension of bias or unfair trial (Gujarat Electricity Board v. Atmaram Poshani, 1989). 3. Common questions of law/fact in related suits. 4. Balance of convenience for parties/witnesses (Arvee Industries). 5. To avoid delay/unnecessary expenses (Shiv Kumari v. Ramajor Shitla Prasad, 1997). 6. To prevent abuse of court process (Maneka Gandhi case). 7. Cases involving important questions of law/public interest. Insufficient Grounds 1. Mere personal inconvenience (Indian Overseas Bank). 2. Vague fear of unfair trial without evidence (Maneka Gandhi). 3. Long distance of court (Manohar Lal v. Seth Hiralal, 1962). 4. Opponent being influential (Subramaniam Swamy case). 5. Presiding judge’s community/religion (Gaja Dhar Prasad v. Sohan Lal). 6. Judge’s past decision in similar case (Krishan Kanahya v. Vijay Kumar). 7. Adverse remarks by judge or prejudice against pleader (not affecting party). Landmark Case: Gujarat Electricity Board v. Atmaram Sungomal Poshani (1989 SC) Facts: • Employee (Atmaram) filed a suit in Bombay against disciplinary proceedings by Gujarat Electricity Board. • Cause of action arose in Gujarat. Issue: • Could Bombay court hear the case? Was there valid apprehension of bias in Gujarat? Decision: • SC transferred case to Gujarat. Principles Laid Down: 1. “Justice must not only be done but must also seem to be done.” 2. Balance of convenience favoured Gujarat (place of cause of action). 3. Mere allegation of bias not enough. Conclusion Sections 22–25 CPC ensure that transfer of cases is possible only when necessary for justice, while protecting the plaintiff’s dominus litis right. Courts exercise this power cautiously, balancing plaintiff’s forum choice and defendant’s fair trial right….
Place of Suing under CPC (Sections 15–21A) Introduction Jurisdiction refers to the power of a court to hear and decide a case and to pass a decree. Before filing a suit, one of the most important considerations is the place of suing, i.e., the venue where the trial will be conducted. The Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) deals with the place of suing under Sections 15–21A, covering aspects such as territorial, pecuniary, and subject-matter jurisdiction. A decree passed by a court lacking jurisdiction is considered a nullity. However, there is a difference between errors relating to territorial/pecuniary jurisdiction and subject-matter jurisdiction. While errors in the former make the decision irregular, errors in the latter render the decree void. Types of Jurisdiction 1. Territorial (Local) Jurisdiction • Every court has geographical limits within which it can exercise authority. • It cannot pass orders outside its local jurisdiction. 2. Pecuniary Jurisdiction • Courts are restricted by the monetary value of the suits they can hear. • Example: A court with pecuniary jurisdiction up to ₹20,000 cannot entertain a suit valued beyond that. 3. Subject-Matter Jurisdiction • Certain courts are restricted from entertaining certain types of cases. • Example: Presidency Small Causes Courts cannot try suits for partition, redemption of mortgage, or specific performance. • Any decree passed without subject-matter jurisdiction is null and void. Exclusive Jurisdiction Clauses Parties may agree that in case of disputes, a particular court shall have exclusive jurisdiction. However, as held in Hakam Singh v. Gammon (India) Ltd. (1971 SC), parties cannot confer jurisdiction upon a court which otherwise has none under the CPC. But where multiple courts have jurisdiction, parties may choose one. Such clauses are not invalid under Sections 23 and 28 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872. Important Provisions (Sections 15–21A CPC) Section 15 – Court in which suits to be instituted • Every suit must be filed in the lowest grade competent court. • Jurisdiction is determined by the plaintiff’s valuation of the suit. • Later increase/decrease in value does not affect jurisdiction. Case Law: Harshad Chiman Lal v. DLF Universal Ltd. (2005) – A decree passed by a court without jurisdiction is null and void. Section 16 – Suits to be instituted where subject-matter situate • Applies to suits relating to immovable property: • Recovery of property • Partition • Mortgage suits • Determination of rights • Wrong to immovable property • Such suits must be filed where the property is located. Proviso: If relief can be obtained by personal obedience of defendant, the suit may also be filed where the defendant resides or works. Section 17 – Immovable property within jurisdiction of different courts • If property is situated in areas falling under multiple courts, the suit may be filed in any one of the courts, provided the entire claim is cognizable by it. • Objective: Prevents multiplicity of suits. Section 18 – Where jurisdiction of courts is uncertain • If it is uncertain in which court’s jurisdiction the property falls, any of the courts may entertain the suit after recording a statement of uncertainty. • Objections cannot be raised later unless there has been failure of justice. Section 19 – Suits for compensation for wrongs to person or movables • Plaintiff has an option to file a suit either: • Where the wrong was committed, or • Where the defendant resides/works for gain. Example: A residing in Delhi beats B in Calcutta → B can sue either in Calcutta or Delhi. Section 20 – Other suits where defendants reside or cause of action arises • Subject to above provisions, suits can be filed where: (a) Defendant resides/carries on business/works for gain. (b) Any one of multiple defendants resides, provided leave of court or acquiescence by others. (c) Cause of action arises, wholly or partly. Explanation: • A corporation is deemed to carry on business at its principal office or at a subordinate office where cause of action arises. Case Law: South East Asia Shipping Co. Ltd. v. Nav Bharat Enterprises (1996) – Cause of action means the bundle of facts necessary to prove a claim. Section 21 – Objections to jurisdiction • Objections as to jurisdiction (territorial/pecuniary/place of suing) must satisfy three conditions: 1. Taken in the trial court. 2. Raised at the earliest opportunity. 3. There has been failure of justice. Case Law: Pathumma v. Kuntalan Kutty (1981) – All three conditions must co-exist. Section 21A – Bar on suit to set aside decree on objection as to place of suing • No fresh suit can be filed challenging a decree merely on the ground that the suit was filed in the wrong place. • Example: If Court A passes a decree, the defendant cannot later challenge it saying Court B was the proper place. Illustrations (Practical Examples) • Defamation: A resides in Delhi, defamatory statements published in Calcutta → Suit can be filed in Delhi or Calcutta. • Immovable Property: Property in Chandigarh but defendant resides in Delhi → Suit can be filed in Chandigarh or Delhi (if relief is possible by defendant’s personal obedience). • Contract: Contract made in Delhi, performance in Bombay, payment in Calcutta → Suit can be filed in Delhi, Bombay, or Calcutta. Conclusion The provisions of Sections 15–21A CPC ensure a fair, convenient, and just system for determining the place of suing. They prevent forum shopping, ensure that suits are tried in competent courts, and balance the interests of both plaintiffs and defendants. Errors regarding territorial or pecuniary jurisdiction are treated as irregularities, while absence of subject-matter jurisdiction renders a decree void. Thus, these provisions act as safeguards against misuse of jurisdiction and promote judicial efficiency. ✓ To start your preparation for Judicial Services Examination at home, drop a message on WhatsApp +91 8840961324 or call us on +91 9151591324 At Theory of Abrogation, we equip you with everything you need: •Subject-wise expert classes •Mock test series •Legal current affairs •Personalized mentorship for interview preparation “Your law degree is your foundation, but your…
Foreign Judgments under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 A foreign judgment plays an important role in determining the conclusiveness of decisions passed by foreign courts and their enforcement in India. The Indian Civil Procedure Code (CPC), 1908, under Sections 2(5), 2(6), 13, 14 and 44A, along with principles of res judicata, lays down the rules regarding when and how such judgments are binding in India. Meaning of Foreign Court and Foreign Judgment • Section 2(5), CPC: “Foreign Court” means a court situated outside India and not established or continued by the authority of the Central Government. • Section 2(6), CPC: “Foreign Judgment” means the judgment of a foreign court. Thus, for a judgment to be treated as a foreign judgment in India, it must come from a court situated outside India and not recognized as an Indian court. Res Judicata and Foreign Judgment • Section 11 CPC (Res Judicata) does not directly apply to foreign judgments. • However, the broad principle of res judicata applies under Section 13 CPC, provided that the conditions laid down therein are satisfied. When is a Foreign Judgment Conclusive? (Section 13 CPC) A foreign judgment shall be conclusive as to any matter directly adjudicated upon between the same parties under the same title, except in the following situations: 1. Lack of Jurisdiction – The foreign court had no jurisdiction. 2. Not on Merits – Judgment not passed after considering evidence and applying judicial mind. 3. Incorrect View of International Law / Ignoring Indian Law – When Indian law is applicable but ignored. 4. Violation of Natural Justice – No fair hearing, no summons served, or denial of opportunity to cross-examine. 5. Fraud – Judgment obtained by fraud or misrepresentation. 6. Breach of Indian Law – Judgment based on a claim violating Indian law. Effect: If none of the above exceptions apply, the Indian courts are bound to treat the foreign judgment as final and conclusive. Key Requirements for Binding Effect For a foreign judgment to operate conclusively in India: • Parties must be the same (or their representatives). • They must sue under the same title. • The matter (issue) decided must be the same. Example: If A sues B in the U.S. court and the matter is decided, then A cannot re-litigate the same issue in India, subject to Section 13 exceptions. Presumption as to Jurisdiction and Genuineness • Section 14 CPC: When a certified copy of a foreign judgment is produced, the Indian court shall presume the foreign court had jurisdiction, unless proved otherwise. • Section 86 Evidence Act (old Sec. 88 BSA): The Indian court may presume certified copies of foreign judicial records to be genuine. Thus, once a certified copy is filed, the burden shifts to the opposite party to prove lack of jurisdiction or any exception under Section 13. Jurisdiction of Foreign Courts – Section 13(a) CPC For a foreign court to have jurisdiction: 1. The parties must be domiciled in that foreign country, or 2. They must consent to its jurisdiction (expressly or by acquiescence). • If summons is received and the party contests on merits without objecting to jurisdiction → jurisdiction by acquiescence. • If summons is ignored or objection is raised → foreign court has no jurisdiction. Clause (b) & (d): Judgment on Merits & Natural Justice • Judgment on Merits (Clause b): Only when both parties were heard, evidence was considered, and judicial mind was applied. An ex parte decree without evidence is not on merits. • Violation of Natural Justice (Clause d): Where summons not served, no opportunity of hearing/cross-examination given. Often, both clauses overlap. Clause (e): Foreign Judgment Obtained by Fraud Fraud vitiates all judicial proceedings. Examples: • Jurisdictional Fraud: False claim of domicile. • Fraud in Service of Summons: Fabricated proof of service. • Fraudulent Evidence/Documents: False documents presented. Such decrees are not conclusive under Section 13. • Clause (c) & (f): Incorrect Law / Breach of Indian Law • Clause (c): When Indian law is applicable but foreign court applies foreign law. • Clause (f): When decree is based on a breach of Indian law, it is not conclusive. Important Case Laws • Narsimha Rao v. Venkata Lakshmi (1999, SC): U.S. divorce decree held invalid due to lack of jurisdiction, fraud, violation of natural justice, wrong law applied. • Satya v. Teja Singh (1975, SC): U.S. divorce decree invalid – husband falsely claimed domicile. • Gurdas Mann v. Mohinder Singh Brar (1993, P&H HC): Ex parte decree without evidence not conclusive. • International Woollen Mills v. Standard Wool (2000, SC): Burden of proving exceptions lies on the party challenging the judgment. Execution of Foreign Decrees Foreign judgments can be executed in India in two ways: 1. Direct Execution (Sec. 44A CPC): • Applicable only to money decrees from superior courts of reciprocating territories. • Such decrees can be directly filed for execution in Indian courts. 2. Filing a Fresh Suit: • For non-money decrees, or decrees from non-reciprocating territories. • A certified copy of the foreign judgment is filed, and the Indian court passes its own decree. Conclusion The CPC strikes a balance between respecting foreign judicial decisions and protecting Indian legal sovereignty. While Section 13 CPC makes foreign judgments conclusive, it also provides safeguards against lack of jurisdiction, fraud, violation of natural justice, or breach of Indian law. Sections 14 and 44A CPC further regulate the presumption of validity and execution of such decrees. Thus, foreign judgments are respected in India, but only when they meet the tests of fairness, jurisdiction, and conformity with Indian law. ✓ To start your preparation for Judicial Services Examination at home, drop a message on WhatsApp +91 8840961324 or call us on +91 9151591324 At Theory of Abrogation, we equip you with everything you need: •Subject-wise expert classes •Mock test series •Legal current affairs •Personalized mentorship for interview preparation “Your law degree is your foundation, but your preparation is what will build your success.” Join Our New Batch Now! Prepare smart. Prepare…
Haryana ADA 2025 Recruitment and Preparation Guide
Haryana ADA Recruitment 2025 Notification and Guide to Preparation 255 Vacancies Announced The Haryana Public Service Commission (HPSC) has issued the official notification (Advertisement No. 18/2025) for the recruitment of Assistant District Attorney (ADA) posts. A total of 255 vacancies are available across various categories. Main Dates Notification Release Date: 8 August 2025 Application Start Date: 13 August 2025 Application Last Date: 2 September 2025 Screening Test Date: 02.11.2025 Eligibility Criteria Educational Qualification: Degree in Law (LLB) from a recognised institution. Age Limit: 21–42 years as on 2 January 2025. Age Relaxation: As per Haryana government rules. Selection Process The recruitment process will be conducted in multiple stages: Screening Test (Objective) Subject Knowledge Test (Descriptive) Interview/Viva-Voce Document Verification Medical Examination Exam Stages Stage 1: Screening Test Total Questions: 100 Multiple Choice Questions (MCQs) Total Marks: 100 Duration: 2 hours Marking Scheme: All questions carry equal marks. Options per Question: Each question will have five options; the fifth option is for candidates who choose to leave the question unattempted. Negative Marking: Wrong answer: Deduction of 0.25 marks per question. Unattempted without marking the fifth option: Deduction of 0.25 marks per question. Language: Question paper will be available in both English and Hindi. Qualifying Marks: Minimum 25% marks required to clear the Screening Test. Topics / Syllabus – Screening Test General Science (TOA’s GK/GS + Ghatna Chakra) or Lucent or OR NCERT OLD EDITION CLASS 6TH TO 12TH Current Events – National and International Importance (Last 1 year you can cover this from any app for current affairs such as GK Today or Arihant Yearly Current Affairs) History of India (Ancient, Medieval, Modern our TOA GK/GS lectures + Ghatna Chakra) Indian and World Geography (TOA’s GS + Ghatna Chakra) Indian Culture, Indian Polity, and Indian Economy (TOA’s GK/GS + Ghatna Chakra) General Mental Ability – Reasoning and Analytical Abilities- R.S. Aggarwal Basic Numeracy (Class X level) – Numbers and their relations, order of magnitude, etc.- R S Agarwal Data Interpretation (Class X level) – Charts, graphs, tables, data sufficiency, etc.- R S Agarwal Haryana General Knowledge – History, Geography, Polity, Economy, Culture, etc. Haryana GK: Arihant “Know Your State Haryana”. Stage 2: Subject Knowledge Test Duration: 3 hours Total Marks: 150 Language: Question paper will be available in English and Hindi. Type of Paper: Subjective (descriptive answers required). Minimum Qualifying Marks: A candidate must secure at least 35% marks to be eligible for the interview/viva-voce. Shortlisting for Interview: Candidates will be called for the interview in a ratio of 2 times the number of advertised posts (plus bracketed candidates, if any). Only those securing the minimum 35% cut-off marks will be considered. Weightage in Final Selection: Subject Knowledge Test carries 87.5% weightage in the final merit calculation. Minimum qualifying: 35%. Syllabus: Civil Law CPC Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 Indian Contract Act Indian Partnership Act Sale of Goods Act Hindu Law Mohammedan Law & Customary Law Criminal Law Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 Stage 3: Interview Weightage in Final Selection: 12.5% of the total marks. Final Merit List Preparation: The final merit list will be prepared by adding the marks obtained in the Subject Knowledge Test (which carries 87.5% weightage) and the Interview (which carries 12.5% weightage). Final selection will be based on the combined performance in all stages. Essential Qualifications Educational Qualification: Bachelor’s Degree in Law (Professional) from a recognised university. Language Requirement: Hindi or Sanskrit up to Matriculation level or higher. Professional Requirement: Must be enrolled as an Advocate with a Bar Council. Shortlisting for Subject Knowledge Test: Candidates up to four times the number of advertised posts, plus bracketed candidates (in case of tie at the cut-off), will be called for the Subject Knowledge Test, provided they have scored at least 25% in the Screening Test. Final Merit: Marks obtained in the Screening Test will not be counted towards the final selection; it is solely for shortlisting candidates by category. How to Apply (Online) Visit the official HPSC website:gov.in Click on the “Apply Online” link for HPSC ADA Recruitment 2025. Fill in your personal, educational, and contact details. Upload all required documents. Pay the application fee. Submit the form and download a copy for future reference. Application Fee General/Other State candidates: ₹1000 General/OBC/EWS (Haryana): ₹250 Mode of Payment: Online
Res Judicata under Section 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 Meaning & Origin The term Res Judicata comes from Latin, where “Res” means thing or matter and “Judicata” means adjudged or decided. In simple terms, it is a legal doctrine that prevents the re-litigation of a matter already decided by a competent court. This doctrine is based on three maxims: 1. Nemo debet bis vexari pro una et eadem causa – No person should be vexed twice for the same cause. 2. Interest republicae ut sit finis litium – It is in the interest of the State that litigation must come to an end. 3. Res judicata pro veritate occipitur – A judicial decision must be accepted as correct. Statutory Provision Section 11 CPC states: “No Court shall try any suit or issue in which the matter directly and substantially in issue has been directly and 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, in a Court competent to try such subsequent suit or the suit in which such issue has been subsequently raised, and has been heard and finally decided by such Court.” The section contains eight explanations clarifying terms like “former suit”, “competence of court”, “constructive res judicata”, and application in execution proceedings. • Conditions for Application For res judicata to apply, the following must be satisfied: 1. The matter must be directly and substantially in issue in both suits. 2. The prior suit must be between the same parties or their legal representatives. 3. The parties must have litigated under the same title. 4. The earlier court must have been competent to try the later suit. 5. The matter must have been heard and finally decided. ✓ Matter in Issue Types of Issues • Issue of Fact – Always operates as res judicata. • Issue of Law – Only when connected with facts. • Mixed Issue of Fact & Law – Also operates as res judicata. The Supreme Court in Mathura Prasad v. Dossibai held that a decision on a point of law operates as res judicata if it is not independent of the facts of the case. • Classification 1. Directly and Substantially in Issue Essential for the decision of the case. Example: Dispute over ownership or tenancy in an eviction case. 2. Collaterally or Incidentally in Issue Side issues arising in the case; findings here do not bar re-litigation. √ Constructive Res Judicata (Explanation IV to Section 11 CPC) If a party could and should have raised a ground in a previous suit but did not, the law will treat it as if it had been raised and decided. Test: • Is the present issue connected to the earlier suit? • Could and should it have been raised earlier? • Was it known or discoverable with due diligence? Example: State of U.P. v. Nawab Hussain – Second suit on a new ground barred because it could have been raised earlier. ∆ Parties Covered • Same Parties – Even if roles are reversed (plaintiff ↔ defendant). • Co-defendants & Co-plaintiffs – If there was a necessary conflict decided in the earlier suit. • Parties Claiming Under Same Title – Through sale, gift, succession, will, lease, etc. • Representative Suits – Under Explanation VI, bona fide litigation on public/common rights binds all interested parties. • Competency of Court The competence of the former court is judged as on the date of the first suit. It can be: • Exclusive jurisdiction courts (e.g., Revenue Court). • Limited jurisdiction courts (decision still binding). • Concurrent jurisdiction courts. ✓ Final Decision Requirement Res judicata applies only if the earlier decision was on merits, including: • Ex parte decrees (if on merits). • Decrees on awards. ✓ No res judicata if dismissed for technical reasons like: • Lack of jurisdiction • Non-joinder of parties • Improper valuation • Premature suit Special Points • Withdrawal of suit – No bar. • Compromise decree – Not res judicata, but estoppel may apply. • Appeal pending – Decision loses finality; becomes res sub judice. • Not applicable to Habeas Corpus petitions. • Res Judicata vs Estoppel Res Judicata:-Based on court’s decision Estoppel:-Based on party’s conduct Res Judicata:-Public policy – end litigation Estoppel:-Equity – prevent inconsistent statements Res Judicata:-Bars jurisdiction Estoppel:-Rule of evidence Res Judicata:-Binds both parties Estoppel:-Binds only the party making earlier representation ∆ Exceptions 1. Waiver of plea. 2. Interlocutory orders. 3. Dismissal of SLP without reasons. 4. Different cause of action. 5. Judgment by fraud or collusion. 6. Court lacking jurisdiction. 7. Change in law creating new rights. ✓ Leading Cases • Daryao v. State of U.P. – Writ under Article 32 barred after dismissal under Article 226. • State of U.P. v. Nawab Hussain – New ground in later suit barred. • Devilal Modi v. STO – Second writ petition on new grounds barred. • Sulochana Amma v. Narayanan Nair – Even limited jurisdiction courts’ decisions can bind. Conclusion The doctrine of res judicata is a cornerstone of civil justice. It ensures finality of litigation, prevents multiplicity of suits, and protects the authority of judicial decisions. However, its application must balance justice and fairness, avoiding injustice under the guise of finality. ✓ To start your preparation for Judicial Services Examination at home, drop a message on WhatsApp +91 8840961324 or call us on +91 9151591324 At Theory of Abrogation, we equip you with everything you need: •Subject-wise expert classes •Mock test series •Legal current affairs •Personalized mentorship for interview preparation “Your law degree is your foundation, but your preparation is what will build your success.” Join Our New Batch Now! Prepare smart. Prepare with Theory of Abrogation. Contact Us: B-109, Commercial Complex Dr. Mukherjee Nagar, Delhi-09 +91 9971399324 | +91 8840961324 [email protected]
Res Sub Judice: Stay of Suit under section 10 cpc
Res Sub Judice: Stay of Suit under Section 10 CPC Introduction Section 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) embodies the doctrine of Res Sub Judice, which literally means “a matter under judicial consideration”. The provision is aimed at preventing simultaneous trials of two suits in different courts when the matter in issue is the same, thereby avoiding conflicting decisions and multiplicity of proceedings. Statutory Provision Section 10 reads as follows: “No court shall proceed with the trial of any suit in which the matter in issue is also directly and substantially in issue in a previously instituted suit between the same parties, or between parties under whom they or any of them claim litigating under the same title where such suit is pending in the same or any other court in India having jurisdiction to grant the relief claimed, or in any court beyond the limits of India established or constituted by the Central Government and having like jurisdiction, or before the Supreme Court.” Explanation: The pendency of a suit in a foreign court does not preclude Indian courts from trying a suit founded on the same cause of action. Object of Section 10 The primary purpose of Section 10 is: • To avoid multiplicity of proceedings. • To prevent two courts of concurrent jurisdiction from trying the same matter at the same time. • To avoid the risk of conflicting decisions. Conditions for Applicability For Section 10 to apply, the following conditions must be satisfied: 1. There must be two suits – one previously instituted and another subsequently instituted. 2. The matter in issue in the subsequent suit must be directly and substantially in issue in the previous suit. 3. Both suits must be between the same parties or their representatives. 4. The parties must be litigating under the same title in both suits. 5. The previously instituted suit must be pending in a court having jurisdiction to grant the relief claimed in the subsequent suit. 6. Section 10 applies only to suits (including appeals) and not to applications or complaints. ✓ Meaning of “Matter in Issue” The expression “matter in issue” means the entire matter in controversy in the suit, not just some issues. Mere overlapping of issues is insufficient. Example: Recovery of rent for one period and rent for a later period with ejectment would not be considered the same matter in issue. Illustrations 1. Claim for Rent: A sues B for rent. B denies rent is due. The claim for rent is directly and substantially in issue. 2. Title & Rent: A sues B for declaration of title and for rent of the same land. Both title and rent are directly and substantially in issue. 3. Trademark Dispute: If A company sues B company for infringement and B files a similar suit against A in another court, the latter must be stayed. Scope of Section 10 • Bar on Trial, Not Institution: Section 10 does not prohibit filing of a subsequent suit; it only bars its trial until the earlier suit is decided. • Mandatory Nature: The provision is mandatory and applies whenever conditions are met. • Inherent Powers: If conditions are not strictly met, courts can use inherent powers under Section 151 CPC to stay proceedings in the interest of justice. Effect of Contravention A decree passed in contravention of Section 10 is not void; it remains valid unless set aside. The rule can also be waived by parties if they consent to proceed with the subsequent suit. Interim Orders A stay of the suit does not prevent the court from passing interim orders such as injunctions, appointment of receiver, attachment before judgment, etc. Test for Applicability The key test is whether the decision in the earlier suit would operate as res judicata in the later suit. If yes, the later suit must be stayed. Consolidation of Suits To avoid conflicting judgments, courts may consolidate suits between the same parties involving substantially the same issues. ∆ Difference between Res Judicata and Res Sub Judice 1. Res Judicata: Applies to matters already adjudicated (final decision). 2. Res Sub Judice: Applies to matters pending decision in a previously instituted suit. Conclusion Section 10 CPC is a procedural safeguard ensuring judicial discipline by avoiding parallel trials over the same dispute. While it bars the trial of a subsequent suit, it leaves room for necessary interim relief and consolidation, ultimately aiming to protect the integrity and efficiency of the judicial process. ✓ To start your preparation for Judicial Services Examination at home, drop a message on WhatsApp +91 8840961324 or call us on +91 9151591324 At Theory of Abrogation, we equip you with everything you need: •Subject-wise expert classes •Mock test series •Legal current affairs •Personalized mentorship for interview preparation “Your law degree is your foundation, but your preparation is what will build your success.” Join Our New Batch Now! Prepare smart. Prepare with Theory of Abrogation. Contact Us: B-109, Commercial Complex Dr. Mukherjee Nagar, Delhi-09 +91 9971399324 | +91 8840961324 [email protected]