Ruheen Moti, Jindal Global Law School
ABSTRACT
The doctrine of Res Judicata is derived from the Latin maxim “Res Judicata pro veritate accipitur”. However, over the years it has been shrunk to “Res Judicata” wherein “Res” means “subject matter” and “judicata” means adjudged. In the words of Sir Lawrence Jenkins “while founded on ancient precedent, Res Judicata is dictated by a wisdom which is for all time”1. In Sri B. Temple v. V.V. Bhavanarayanacharyulu,2 the Supreme Court observed:
“The doctrine of Res Judicata is not confined to the limits prescribed in Section 11, Civil Procedure Code. The underlying principle of that doctrine is that there should be finality in litigation and that a person should not be vexed twice over in respect of the same matter.”
The primary objective of this doctrine is that a party should have their opportunity to present their case in court and once the court has made its final decision, its result becomes binding and cannot be reopened. It can thus be put forth that the decision becomes Res Judicata. Once the cause of action is decided on by the courts and finally determined without appeal, it cannot be relitigated by the same or any other court by that fact. 3Following the announcement of a final judgment in a case, the judges will apply the Res Judicata concept "to preserve the effect of the first judgment" when faced with a claim that is identical to or substantially similar to the earlier one. This is ostensibly done to protect the parties involved in a case from injustice, but it's also probably done to save the judicial system from needlessly wasting time and resources.
コメント