Relation amongst “RJ/ RSJ/ Estoppel” under CPC, 1908
Difference b/w RJ & Estoppel—
The doctrine of Res Judicata (RJ) is often treated as a branch of law of estoppel. RJ is really estoppels by verdict or estoppels by judgment (record). The rule of CRJ is nothing else but a rule of estoppel. But still there are following differences b/w them—
- The provision relating to RJ is given u/s 11 of CPC and is procedural in nature whereas the provisions relating to estoppels is given u/s 115 of Indian Evidence Act, 1872 which is substantive in nature.
- RJ results from a decision of the court whereas estoppels flows from the act of the parties.
- The rule of RJ is based upon the public policy that there should be an end to litigation. On the other hand, estoppels proceeds upon the doctrine of equity that he who, by his conduct, has induced another to alter his position to his disadvantage, can not turn round and take advantage of such alteration of other’s position. In other words, while RJ bars multiplicity of suits, estoppels prevents multiplicity of representations.
- RJ ousts the jurisdiction of a court to try a case and precludes an enquiry at the threshold while estoppels is only a rule of evidence and shuts the mouth of a party.
- RJ prohibits a man averring(speaking) the same thing in successive litigations, while estoppels prevents him from saying one thing at one time and opposite at another.
- The rule of RJ presumes conclusively the truth of the decision in the former suit, while the rule of estoppels prevents a party from denying what he has once called the truth.
- While RJ binds both the parties to a litigation, estoppels binds only that party who made representation.
Difference b/w RJ and Res Sub-judice (RSJ)—
- The provisions relating to RSJ is given u/s 10 while the provisions relating to RJ are given u/s 11 of CPC.
- RJ applies to a matter already adjudicated upon while RSJ applies to a matter pending trial (sub-judice).
- The RJ bars the trial of a suit which has been decided in a former suit. While, RSJ stays trial of a suit which has been previously instituted and is pending.
- If a proceeding is pending in a foreign court then as per exception to Section 10 of CPC, courts are not bound by such pendency, whereas if the matter has been already decided by the foreign court in terms of Sections 13 & 14 that decisions are applicable to Indian courts also and the rule of RJ will be applicable.
_____________________________________________________________________
Prepared by team LegalMines and typographical error, if any, is inadvertent.
