Question: Does the doctrine of res judicata apply in a case of a consent decree or compromise decree? Give reasons and also refer to the case law, if any, on the point. [Raj. J.S. 1974] Find the answer to the mains question only on Legal Bites. [Does the doctrine of res judicata apply in a case of a consent… Read More »

Question: Does the doctrine of res judicata apply in a case of a consent decree or compromise decree? Give reasons and also refer to the case law, if any, on the point. [Raj. J.S. 1974] Find the answer to the mains question only on Legal Bites. [Does the doctrine of res judicata apply in a case of a consent decree or compromise decree? Give reasons and also refer to the case law, if any, on the point.] Answer Order XXIII Rule 3 CPC pertaining to the compromise of the suit is...

Question: Does the doctrine of res judicata apply in a case of a consent decree or compromise decree? Give reasons and also refer to the case law, if any, on the point. [Raj. J.S. 1974]

Find the answer to the mains question only on Legal Bites. [Does the doctrine of res judicata apply in a case of a consent decree or compromise decree? Give reasons and also refer to the case law, if any, on the point.]

Answer

Order XXIII Rule 3 CPC pertaining to the compromise of the suit is as follows:

Compromise of the suit: Where it is proved to the satisfaction of the court that a suit has been adjusted wholly or in part by any lawful agreement or compromise, in writing and signed by the parties or where the defendant satisfies the plaintiff in respect of the whole or any part of the subject-matter of the suit, the Court shall order such agreement, compromise or satisfaction to be recorded and shall pass a decree in accordance therewith so far as it relates to the parties to the suit, whether or not “the subject-matter of the agreement, compromise or satisfaction is the same as the subject matter of the suit.”

It is notable that one of the essential conditions for the application of ‘Doctrine of res judicata’ incorporated in section 11 of CPC is that suit /proceeding must have been heard and decided by the court.

In the case of Subba Rao v. Jagannadha Rao, AIR 1967 SC 591, the court held that A compromise decree is not a decision of the court. It is accepted by the court of something to which the parties had agreed. A compromise decree merely sets the seal of the court on the agreement of the parties.

The court does not decide anything. Nor can it be said that a decision of the court is implicit in it. Hence, a compromise decree cannot operate as res judicata. A consent decree (Compromise decree) does not stand on a higher footing than a contract between the parties.

The Court always has the jurisdiction to set aside a consent decree upon any ground which will invalidate an agreement between the parties. In the absence of any such ground, the consent decree is binding on the parties.

Hence, A consent decree, according to the decisions of this Court, does not operate as res judicata, because a consent decree is merely the record of a contract between the parties to a suit, to which is superadded the seal of the Court.


Important Mains Questions Series for Judiciary, APO & University Exams

  1. CPC Mains Questions Series: Important Questions Part – I of X
  2. CPC Mains Questions Series: Important Questions Part – II of X
  3. CPC Mains Questions Series: Important Questions Part – III of X
  4. CPC Mains Questions Series: Important Questions Part – IV of X
  5. CPC Mains Questions Series: Important Questions Part – V of X
  6. CPC Mains Questions Series: Important Questions Part – VI of X
  7. CPC Mains Questions Series: Important Questions Part – VII of X
  8. CPC Mains Questions Series: Important Questions Part – VIII of X
  9. CPC Mains Questions Series: Important Questions Part – IX of X
  10. CPC Mains Questions Series: Important Questions Part – X of X
Updated On 2021-12-16T12:05:32+05:30
Admin LB

Admin LB

Next Story