CPC HOMEWORK-8

1. CASE NAME- GULAM SARWAR V. UNION OF INDIA

CITATION- AIR 1967 SC 1335

Interpretation of Court :

 Res judicata; it is defined in Section 11 of the Civil Procedure cose has been evolved
from a Latin maxim, which means if an issue is brought in the court it has already been
decided by another court, between the same parties. Here, The Hon’ble Supreme Court
held that the concept of Res Judicata applies to Writ proceedings. The doctrine apples to
writ proceedings yet it is not advisable to extrapolate the application of doctrine to writ of
Habeaus corpus.
 If the general rules of Res Judicata are applied to the writs of Habeas corpus then it
thwarts the ends of justice.
(Habeas corpus :- A writ requiring a person under arrest to be brought before a judge or
into court, especially to secure the person’s release until lawful grounds are shown for
their detention)

2. CASE NAME- LALLUBHAI V. UNION OF INDIA

CITATION- AIR 1981 SC 72

Interpretation of Court :
 Here, it can be interpreted that Indian Constitution always tries to make sure that
the rights of the citizens of the country areever well protected and given priority
and ensures a prosperous democracy in a country.
 Application of Constructive res judicata is limited to civil actions and civil
proceedings and cannot be applicable to illegal detentions or the writ of habeas
 corpus. It does not bar a subsequent petition for a writ of habeas corpus under
Article 32 of Indian Constitution on fresh grounds, which were not taken earlier.

3. CASE NAME- ISWAR DUTT V. LAND ACQUISITION COLLECTOR

CITATION- AIR 2005 SC 3165

Interpretation of Court:

 As the writ petition had been filed in public interest, in the direction No.4 it was ordered
by the court that all the Land – owners whose land had been taken possession of in either
of the awards would be entitled to the similar relief.
 The principles of res judicata can be invoked not only in a subsequent proceeding but
also in subsequent stage of the same proceeding. Once an order made in the course of a
proceeding becomes final, it would be binding at the subsequent stage of the proceeding.

YELISETTY VINAYA
2018LLB102