Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 3 of 3 (0.25 seconds)Section 11 in The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 [Entire Act]
Official Assignee vs Jagabandhu Mullick And Ors. on 13 February, 1934
10. Mr. K.G. Datar in this behalf drew our attention to a decision of the Calcutta High Court reported in Official Assignee of Calcutta v. Jagabandhu Mallik (1934) I.L.R. 61 Cal. 494. There the conflict was between lis pendens on the one hand and constructive res judicata on the other. The Courts below had found that the rule of constructive res judicata applied and they also referred in their respective judgments to the question of the applicability of the doctrine of lis pendens. The trial Court refused to allow the question of lis pendens to be raised on the ground that no such ease had been set up in the plaint, and accordingly dismissed the suit; but the lower appellate Court allowed the question to be raised as all. necessary facts had been stated in the plaint, and! holding that the doctrine of Us pendens should prevail over the rule of constructive res judicata, allowed the appeal and decreed the plaintiff's suit. It appears to have been conceded before the High Court that the view of the lower appellate Court that the doctrine of Us pendens should prevail over the rule of constructive res judicata could not be supported and the decision of the learned Judges was based only on the question whether the rule of constructive res judicata, applied to the case or not.
1