Doctrine of res judicata not applicable if petitioner not impleaded as party: Punjab and Haryana High Court

Subject: Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961 - Section 7(1)(2) - Estoppel principle of constructive res judicata - Breach of principle - Quashing of impugned orders.

On 2 May 2023, the Punjab and Haryana High Court declared, In Mewa Singh Vs Divisional Commissioner, Hisar, that the principle of constructive res judicata applies to subsequent motions that are similar to earlier petitions in terms of causes of action, reliefs, and khasra numbers. The Court observed that a previous petition filed by the petitioner, Gram Panchayat Rajthal, against the respondents had been dismissed, but since the petitioner or their predecessor in interest had not been impleaded as a party, the doctrine of res judicata did not apply. However, the Court found that the causes of action, reliefs, and khasra numbers in the earlier petition were similar to those in the present petition.

The Court referred to Section 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, which is statutorily engrafted to curtail the menace of multiplicity of proceedings and recurrence of proceedings despite conclusive and binding decisions being earlier made inter-se parties, causes of action, or reliefs or over the subject matters which are similar to the subsequent petition. The Court found that the impugned annexures suffer from a breach of the principle of constructive res judicata, and the necessary sequel is that the impugned annexures are stained and are quashed and set aside.

The petitioner had filed a petition under Section 7(1)(2) of the Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961, claiming that the respondent had encroached upon the Gair Mumkin Gali. The Collector had accepted the petition, but the aggrieved party had appealed the decision. The Appellate Authority had declined relief, and the Revisional Authority also refused to grant the revision petition. The petitioner then filed the present petition before the Punjab and Haryana High Court.

The Court noted that the earlier petition instituted by the Gram Panchayat Rajthal against the respondents had resulted in a dismissal order being made on the said petition. One of the respondents who had been impleaded was the predecessor in interest of the present petitioner, Ajit Singh. Therefore, when the decision was made in the earlier petition inter-se the parties similar to those in the subsequent petition, the subsequent motion as laid before the statutory authorities concerned was necessarily barred by the estopping principle of res judicata.

The Court declared that when the above statutory principle is evidently infracted, the impugned annexures suffer from a vice of breach being caused to the principle of constructive res judicata. As a result, the impugned orders are stained, and they were declared to be so. The Court allowed the writ petition.

On 2 May 2023

Mewa Singh vs Divisional Commissioner, Hisar Circle, Hisar & Ors.