Decree Against Plaintiff By Default Bars Fresh Suit On Same Cause Of Action By Successor In Title
The purchaser is sailing in the same boat as that of the original plaintiffs, he cannot be said to be having better rights than the original plaintiffs.” The Supreme Court held that the decree against plaintiffs by default bars fresh suit on the same cause of action by their successor in title.
The bench comprising Justice Arun Mishra and Justice MR Shah set aside a High Court order on the ground that in the previous suit filed by vendors of the plaintiff; a similar relief was prayed. The said suit was dismissed under the provisions of Order IX Rule 8 of the CPC as the counsel for defendants was present and counsel for the plaintiffs was absent.
The High Court, in a second appeal, had decreed the suit on the ground that it was on a different cause of action. The High Court had noticed that the previous suit was filed by the vendors of the plaintiff against the first defendant for declaration of their right and title and the said suits were dismissed for non-prosecution. It was further held that the plaintiff, who was only a mortgagee, had purchased the property in discharge of the debt and thus the cause of action to maintain the present suit, so far as the plaintiff is concerned, is the mortgage deed.
Setting aside the judgment of the High Court, the bench, said that it erred in law in holding that the subsequent suit was based on a different cause of action, as such it was maintainable. It said:
“The purchaser is sailing in the same boat as that of the original plaintiffs, he cannot be said to be having better rights than the original plaintiffs.”