Is the principle "Resjudicata" applicable in interlocutory application. If so under what circumstances. I have done sufficient research in this regard. I hope some body on this domain will further assit me with latest judgments on this issue
No, the Principle of Resjudicata does not apply to Interlocutory Application.As the interlocutory orders do not decide any matter in issue arising in the suit nor do they put an end to the litigation and do not decide the legal rights of the parties to the litigation, the principle of res judicata does not apply to the findings on which these orders are based. If a similar application is made for similar relief on the basis of same facts after the earlier application has been disposed of, the court would be justified in rejecting the application as an abuse of process of the court. But when there are changed circumstances the court is perfectly justified in entertaining a second application.
Thulasirengan vs. R. Arjunan , 2016
An Interlocutory Application which leaves the matter for open consideration at the later stage will not operate as a resjudicata.
Kanwar singh saini v. High Court of Delhi, (2012) 4 SCC 307.
An interim order always merges in the final order after decree is passed and where the case is dismissed , interim order automatically stands nullified.
-- Revision petitions can lie against an interlocutory order with the sole purpose to correct jurisdictional errors only.Therefore an order granting or refusing to grant amendment of pleadings is not revisable under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, particularly after its amendment in the year 2002.
Tek Singh vs. Shashi Verma, AIR (2019) SC 1047.
The interlocutory application filed under Order 39 Rule 1 CPC was dismissed by Trial Court holding that the relief asked for could not be granted as it would amount to decreeing the Suit itself. The Appellate Court dismissed the appeal and in the revision petition filed under Section 115 CPC, the High Court set aside the concurrent findings of fact and allowed it. The Supreme court set aside the ruling of the appellate court observing that “every legal canon has been thrown to the winds by the impugned judgment” and restored the judgment of the Courts below.