Upgrad
LCI Learning

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

ravisharma   31 July 2018

Vexatious litigation

my father is struggling a partition suit for past 10 years. The plaintiffs have in past filed various suits in other courts against same property bending the language of plaints. now they have come up with another suit under 39 2a (disobeying injunction orders) involving other family names unnecessarily. all the suits have been rejected by the courts. Is there any law or provision where i can file application againt multiple or vexatious suits or for making unnecessary parties? I have consulted local lawyer but they have said the only remedy is to contest suits on merit.



Learning

 3 Replies

Adv Deepak Joshi +917017821512 (Advocate)     31 July 2018

Hope information will help you

Section 10 Civil procedure code . Stay of suit— 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 continued 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 the Courts in India from trying a suit founded on the same cause of action.

Section 11 Civil procedure code. Res judicata— 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. Explanation I.—The expression "former suit" shall denote a suit which has been decided prior to the suit in question whether or not it was instituted prior thereto. Explanation II.—For the purposes of this section, the competence of a Court shall be determined irrespective of any provisions as to a right of appeal from the decision of such Court. Explanation III.—The matter above referred to must in the former suit have been alleged by one party and either denied or admitted, expressly or impliedly, by the other. Explanation IV.—Any matter which might and ought to have been made ground of defence or attack in such former suit shall be deemed to have been a matter directly and substantially in issue in such suit. Explanation V.—Any relief claimed in the plaint, which is not expressly granted by the decree, shall, for the purposes of this section, be deemed to have been refused. Explanation VI.—Where persons litigate bona fide in respect of public right or of a private right claimed in common for themselves and others, all persons interested in such right shall, for the purposes of this section, be deemed to claim under the persons so litigating. [8] [Explanation VII.—The provisions of this section shall apply to a proceeding for the execution of a decree and reference in this section to any suit, issue or former suit shall be construed as references, respectively, to proceedings for the execution of the decree, question arising in such proceeding and a former proceeding for the execution of that decree. Explanation VIII.—An issue heard and finally decided by a Court of limited jurisdiction, competent to decide such issue, shall operate as res judicata in as subsequent suit, notwithstanding that such Court of limited jurisdiction was not competent to try such subsequent suit or the suit in which such issue has been subsequently raised.] 

ravisharma   31 July 2018

Thank you very much.. we have discussed same grounds but it seems concept of res judicata does not apply on quasi criminal appeals and also the plaintiff have significantly altered the plaints in different suits on same property.

Adv Deepak Joshi +917017821512 (Advocate)     01 August 2018

If possible for you drop complete facts on Djaa.legal@gmail.com.

Will see if something is missing.


Leave a reply

Your are not logged in . Please login to post replies

Click here to Login / Register