No civil suit against co-operative group housing society

An extract from the case filed by Khosla Compressors co-operative group housing society Ltd versus Barun Kumar Yadav

No civil suit against co-operative group housing society – Res Judicata

IN THE COURT OF CIVIL JUDGE CUM RC SOUTH WEST DWARKA

MS NEETI SURI MISHRA, CIVIL JUDGE

DWARKA DISTRICT COURTS, NEW DELHI – 110075

CS-SCJ/426287/2016

In the matter of

M/S Khosla Compressors Staff CGHS Ltd                                 Petitioner

Versus

Mr. BK Yadav & Ors                                                                   Defendant

APPLICATION OF DEFENDANT UNDER SECTION 11 and 12 READ WITH SECTION 151 OF THE CIVIL PROCEDURES CODE, 1908 (AS AMENDED UP TO DATE) TO DISMISS THIS SUIT AND AWARD COMPENSATION FOR INTENTIONALLY PURSUING THIS CASE

Most respectfully Showeth:

THE APPLICANT / DEFENDANT IN THIS APPLICATION

  1. That, the Applicant/Defendant is purchaser of flat from original allottee Mrs. Shanti Kathuria D/O Late Shri Shanti Lal Malik and in possession of the said Flat No.452 in Khosla Compressors Staff CGHS Ltd (popularly known as Jai Maa Apartment also) registered with the Registrar of Co-operative Societies under No.943 (GH) dated 25.11.1983.

THE RESPONDENT / PETITIONER IS GOVERNED UNDER THE SPECIAL ACT

  1. That, the Petitioner in this case is M/S Khosla Compressors Staff Co-Operative Group Housing Society Ltd registered under Special Act namely “the Delhi Co-operative Societies Act, 2003. Entire complex of flats and Common Areas of this Co-operative Society are under superintendence & control of Registrar of Co-operative Society, Delhi.

An extract of res judicata

RES JUDICATA UNDER SECTION 11 OF THE CPC

  1. “No Court shall try any suit or issue in which the matter 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 V: Any relief claimed in the plaint, which is not expressly granted by the decree, shall for the purpose of this section, be deemed to have been refused.

 EXPLANATON VIII: An issue heard and finally decided by a court of limited jurisdiction, competent to decide such issue, shall operate as res judicata in a subsequent suit, not withstanding 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.

About the author

Advocateji.Com publishes problems of public & provides free advice in 24 hours on its web-site at New Delhi

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.