Legal Phrases and Expressions-6

Unit 2
 Synopsis:
• Res Ipsa Loquitor- case where this doctrine
established
• Res Sub Judice
• Res Judicata
 1. Res Ipsa Loquitor
• Res Ipsa Loquitur literally means “Things speak for itself.”
• Res Ipsa Loquitur is a maxim, the application of which
shifts the burden of proof on the defendant.
• Generally, in a case it is the plaintiff who has to provide
evidence to prove the defendant's negligence. There is
however, a change when this maxim is used. The burden
of proof shifts to the defendant. There is a presumption
of negligence on part of the defendant and it is upto him
to prove his non-liability and that it was not his act which
caused the plaintiff's injury. The defendant leads the
evidence.
 CNTD…
• According to the Blacks Law Dictionary the maxim is defined as the
doctrine providing that, in some circumstances, the mere fact of an
accidents occurrence raises an inference of negligence so as to establish
a prima facie (at first sight) case. It is a symbol for the rule that the fact
of the occurrence of an injury taken with the surrounding circumstances
may permit an inference or raise a presumption of negligence, or make
out a plaintiff's prima facie case and present a question of fact for
defendant to meet wit an explanation.
• It is merely a short way of saying that the circumstances attendant on
the accident are of such a nature to justify a jury in light of common
sense and past experience in inferring that the accident was probably
the result of the defendants negligence, in the absence of explanation or
other evidence which the jury believes.
 Case Law:
• M.C.Mehta v. Union of India (AIR) 1987 SC 965
More popularly known as the Olium gas leak case, this is a Public Interest Litigation
regarding the establishment of enterprises involved in hazardous works in thickly
populated areas in the light of the Olium gas leak. The Olium gas leak had occurred
in the work premises of Shriram Mills.
• Olium is a hazardous gas and this nature of the gas had caused the death of many
people and causing serious injuries to the health of others stying in the close
vicinity.
• It was not possible to establish negligence of the mill owners and Res Ipsa Loquitur
was applied to shift the burden of proof on the mill owners to show that they were
not negligent.
• In the PIL it was pleaded that any industry involved in cases of injuries/damage due
to the hazardous activities it undertakes then the onus must be on them prima facie
to establish that they were not negligent. In this case the maxim was made use of to
establish negligence and they were held liable for the damage and injury caused. It
was further held that any company involved in hazardous activities will be held
negligent prima facie and it is upto them to lead the evidence and prove how they
are not negligent failing which they will be held liable.
 2. Res Sub Judice
• Section 10 deals with Doctrine of Res Sub-Judice.
‘Res’ means matter or litigation and Sub-Judice
means pending (under judgment). Conjoining the
two, it implies that the rule of Res Sub-Judice
relates to a matter which is pending judicial
enquiry.
• In other words, this rule applies where a matter is
already pending before a competent court for the
purpose of adjudication Section 10 of CPC deals
with the stay of civil suits.
 Ingredients of Section 10 are as follows:-
1. Court shall proceed with the trial of any suit:- It is such court
where subsequent litigation has been instituted and not the
court which has taken the adjudication for previous litigation.
2. Matter directly and substantially in issue:- It means the
rights litigated between the parties i.e. the facts on which the
right is claimed and the law applicable to the determination
of that issue.
3. Same Parties:- The previously instituted suit must have been
a suit between the same parties or between the parties
under whom they or any of them is claiming.
4. Same title:- It means same capacity.
5. Previously instituted suit must be pending
 Illustration :
• ‘A’ an agent of ‘S’ at Jaipur agreed to sell S’s
goods in Bangalore. ‘A’ the agent files suit for
balance of accounts in Bangalore. ‘S’ sues the
agent ‘A’ for accounts and his negligence in
Jaipur; while case is pending in Bangalore. In
this case, Jaipur Court is precluded from
conducting trial and can petition Bangalore
Court to direct stay of proceedings against
Jaipur Court.
 3. Res Judicata
• ‘Res’ means ‘subject matter’ or ‘dispute’ and
‘Judicata’ means ‘adjudged’, ‘decided’ or
‘adjudicated’. ‘Res Judicata’ thus means ‘a
matter adjudged’ or ‘a dispute decided’
• “Res Judicata means a final judicial decision
pronounced by a judicial tribunal having
competent jurisdiction over the cause or matter
in litigation and over the parties thereto.”
• Sec. 11 of Civil Procedure code
 CNTD…
• Section 11 of the code of Civil Procedure,
1908, embodies the rule of res judicata or the
rule of conclusiveness of the judgment, as to
the points decided either of facts, or of law, or
of facts and law, in every subsequent suit
between the same parties. It enacts that once
a matter is finally decided by a competent
Court, no party can be permitted to reopen it
in a subsequent litigation.
 CNTD..
• The doctrine of res judicata has been explained by Das Gupta J. in
the case of Satyadhyan Ghosal v. Deorjin Debi as:
• “The principle of res judicata is based on the need of giving a
finality to judicial decisions. What it says is that once
a res is judicata, it shall not be adjudged again. Primarily it applies
as between past litigation and future litigation. When a matter,
whether on a question of fact or a question of law, has been
decided between two parties in one suit or proceeding and the
decision is final, either because no appeal was taken to a higher
Court or because the appeal was dismissed, or no appeal lies,
neither party will be allowed in a future suit or proceeding
between the same parties to canvass the matter again.”
 Object of the doctrine:
• The doctrine of res judicata is conceived in the
larger public interest which requires that all
the litigation must, sooner than later, come to
an end.
• The principle is also founded on justice, equity
and good conscience which require that a
party who has once succeeded on an issue
should not be harassed by multiplicity of
proceedings involving the same issue.
 CNTD….
• Illustration, A sues B for possession of certain
properties on the basis of a sale deed in his favour.
B impugns the deed as fictitious. The plea is upheld
and the suit is dismissed. A subsequent suit for
some other properties on the basis of the same
sale deed is barred as the issue about the fictitious
nature of the sale deed was actually in issue in the
former suit directly and substantially.
 Differentiate between Res-subjudice and
Res-judicata?
• Res- Subjudice (Section 10) means where the
case is pending for hearing, the same cannot be
filed again arising out of same cause of action
and between parties bearing the same title.
• Whereas, Res- Judicata (Section 11) operates
after the case has been finally heard, and
whereby the same parties cannot approach the
court for the same cause of action and relief.
 For further readings refer:
• http://www.legalserviceindia.com/articles/Res
_Ipsa_Loquitur.htm
• http://lawtimesjournal.in/doctrine-of-res-sub-
judice/#:~:text='Res'%20means%20matter%20
or%20litigation,means%20pending%20(under
%20judgment).&text=In%20other%20words%
2C%20this%20rule,the%20stay%20of%20civil
%20suits
.