Supreme Court of India· 12 August 2026

Where two suits filed by the same plaintiff are consolidated by the trial Court and tried together with common evidence resulting in a common judgment, does the bar of res judicata under Section 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 apply where only a single composite appeal is filed against that common judgment?

BASSANNA SINCE DECEASED BY LRS AND OTHERS v. BHIMANNA AND OTHERS

2026 INSC 838
Coram: Ujjal Bhuyan; Atul S. Chandurkar

🔖 Save this judgment 🔔 Follow s.96 Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 📬 Get today's judgments

View the original judgment PDFFree to read. To download it — or the LexStreak typeset copy with the headnote and Points of Law — create an account; downloads are part of the Pro plan.

Answer

No. Res judicata applies only qua a judgment and not a decree, and since the consolidated suits had no independent existence, a specific challenge to the common judgment in a composite appeal is not barred by res judicata.

Headnote

Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 — s.96 — s.100 — s.151 — s.11 — Order XLI Rule 1 — Composite appeal — Two suits, same plaintiff — Curable defect — Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 — s.96 — Composite appeal — Two suits, same plaintiff — Deficiency of form, not substance — Held: A composite appeal under Section 96 of the Code, challenging a common judgment in two suits filed by the same plaintiff and accompanied by certified copies of both decrees with court fees paid for both appeals, was rightly entertained on merits; the absence of a separate memorandum of appeal was a deficiency of form, not substance, and curable. (¶5, 12, 13) Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 — s.11 — Res judicata — No independent existence — Held further: Since the two suits were consolidated and tried together with common evidence, they had no independent existence, and the challenge to the common judgment in a single composite appeal was not barred by res judicata, which applies only qua a judgment and not a decree. (¶14, 15) Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 — s.96 — Second appeals restored — Held further: The impugned judgment of the High Court was set aside, both second appeals preferred by the respondents stand restored before the High Court for being adjudicated afresh on merits, and the civil appeals were allowed. (¶20, 21)

In the Court's own words

Paragraph 14For considering the maintainability of a composite appeal at the behest of an aggrieved party, the test of res judicata would also be crucial. Various situations in which the bar of res judicata would apply are contemplated by Section 11 of the Code. It is material to note that res judicata would apply only qua a judgment and not a decree. We may with advantage refer to the judgment of the Nagpur High Court in Manohar Vinayak and others Vs. Laxman Anandrao Deshmukh and others[^11] wherein it was held as under:

Paragraph 15In the present case, as the plaintiff had challenged the common judgment and decrees passed in the two suits filed by him in a composite appeal, the bar of res judicata would not be attracted. A specific challenge having been mounted to the common judgment by raising numerous grounds in the memorandum of appeal, the appeal was liable to be entertained on merits notwithstanding the fact that it was a composite appeal filed along with requisite court fees, certified copies of the common judgment and both the decrees. Thus, even on this count, the plaintiff cannot be non-suited.

Acts & Sections

s.96 Code of Civil Procedure, 1908s.100 Code of Civil Procedure, 1908s.151 Code of Civil Procedure, 1908s.11 Code of Civil Procedure, 1908Order XLI Rule 1 Code of Civil Procedure, 1908

One judgment a day. That's the whole habit.

Read the full text of BASSANNA SINCE DECEASED BY LRS AND OTHERS v. BHIMANNA AND OTHERS — and get the Supreme Court's output as a five-minute daily read, with plain-language headnotes and the questions each judgment settles.

Create my free account

Free forever plan · 30 seconds · data stays in India

Open the full judgment →

Also decided in this judgment

Under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, is a composite appeal maintainable where the same plaintiff's two suits, clubbed together and tried by common evidence, were dismissed by a common judgment, and certified copies of both decrees along with court fees for both appeals were filed?Does the rule that a plaintiff and a defendant with a counter-claim, whose suit and counter-claim are both dismissed, must file two separate appeals also apply where the same plaintiff files two independent suits that are consolidated and decided by a common judgment?Where a first appellate Court entertains a composite appeal that ought to have been filed as two separate appeals with separate memoranda, and the right of appeal is a substantive right, what course should a court take before dismissing the appeal for that defect?

Plain-language answer prepared by the LexStreak Editorial Desk — verify against the judgment. Source: Supreme Court of India. Corrections