Order 2 Rule 2 bar applies where a later claim arises from the same cause of action and was omitted from the earlier suit.

A later suit for recovery of the Shahjahanpur property was barred by Order 2, Rule 2 CPC because it arose from the same substantive cause of action as the earlier Oudh suit. The controlling test was the bundle of essential facts needed to prove the right, not the form of relief or the defendant's defence. Both suits depended on the same title facts: the ownership of Rani Barkatunnissa, her death, her Sunni faith, and the plaintiffs' heirship under Muhammadan law. The omission of the property from the original claim was not cured by the failed amendment attempt, so the omitted claim could not be pursued separately.

---

---

Issues: Whether the suit for recovery of the Shahjahanpur property was barred by Order 2, Rule 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, because the property had not been included in the earlier Oudh suit.

Analysis: The decisive inquiry was whether the later claim was founded on a cause of action distinct from the earlier suit. The relevant test is the substance of the facts that must be proved to support the right, not the form of the relief or the defendant's defence. The Court held that the plaintiffs' title in both suits rested on the same essential facts, namely the ownership of Rani Barkatunnissa, her death, her Sunni faith, and the plaintiffs' heirship under Muhammadan law. The omission of the Shahjahanpur property from the earlier suit was not cured by the failed attempt to amend the plaint, because the property had in fact been omitted from the original claim. The earlier and later claims also involved the same underlying transaction and the same bundle of essential facts.

Conclusion: The suit was barred by Order 2, Rule 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, and the plea could be raised by the respondents.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a plaintiff omits from an earlier suit a claim that arises from the same substantive cause of action and could have been included, a later suit on that omitted claim is barred by Order 2, Rule 2, notwithstanding that the relief or possession aspect may be differently framed.

---