Appeal Dismissed Due to Constructive Res Judicata in Mortgage Suit

The appeal challenging the Rajasthan High Court's order in a mortgage suit was dismissed, with objections raised by the judgment-debtor after a warrant of attachment being deemed barred by constructive res judicata. The executing Court and Division Bench upheld this decision, emphasizing that objections at later stages are prevented once an order for attachment is issued. The Supreme Court reiterated this stance, affirming that res judicata applies to different stages within the same suit, leading to the dismissal of the appeal for lack of merit.

---

---

Issues involved: Challenge to order under Section 18 of Rajasthan High Court Ordinance 1949, constructive res judicata in execution proceedings.

Summary:
1. The appeal challenged the order of Rajasthan High Court dismissing a special appeal under Section 18 of the Ordinance against a judgment in a mortgage suit. The decree holder sought recovery from the judgment-debtor through multiple execution applications, with the final one filed in 1971. Objections raised by the judgment-debtor after the issuance of a warrant of attachment were dismissed as barred by constructive res judicata. The appeal to the High Court was also dismissed on the same grounds.

2. The executing Court found objections raised after the warrant of attachment was issued to be barred by constructive res judicata, a decision upheld by the Division Bench.

3. The contention regarding objections raised after the warrant of attachment was reiterated before the Supreme Court.

4. Order XXI Rule 22 CPC marks the end of one stage before property attachment in execution proceedings. The Court's order to proceed with attachment, after finding no objections raised, operates as a decree under Section 47 of CPC. Such orders are final unless appealed, preventing objections at later stages.

5. The principles of res judicata apply not only to separate proceedings but also to subsequent stages within the same proceedings, preventing re-agitation of decided matters.

6. Citing legal precedents, the Court affirmed that res judicata applies to different stages of the same suit, preventing re-litigation of matters already decided.

7. The High Court's dismissal of the special appeal and confirmation of the Single Judge's order were deemed justified based on the principles of res judicata. The appeal was found to be without merit and was dismissed accordingly.

---