Res judicata between stages of one proceeding barred reopening the Section 15 objection to the second eviction petition.

An issue conclusively decided at an earlier stage of the same rent control proceeding and allowed to attain finality could not be reopened later. The Supreme Court applied the principle that res judicata operates between successive stages of the same litigation, and noted that a final remand order cannot be questioned by a party that did not challenge it. As a result, the tenants were barred from re-agitating the objection that Section 15 of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965 prevented the second eviction petition under Section 11(3), and the eviction proceedings were not barred on that ground.

---

---

Issues: Whether the tenants could re-agitate, at a subsequent stage of the same rent control proceedings, the question whether Section 15 of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1965 barred the second eviction petition filed under Section 11(3) of that Act.

Analysis: The earlier appellate order holding that the second eviction petition was maintainable and that Section 15 did not bar the proceedings had been carried into the remand stage and allowed to attain finality. Section 105 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 recognizes that errors in interlocutory orders may be raised in an appeal from the final decision, but an order of remand that has become final cannot be questioned later by a party who did not challenge it. The controlling principle is that res judicata applies between successive stages of the same litigation, and an issue decided earlier in the proceeding cannot be reopened later.

Conclusion: The objection based on Section 15 could not be re-agitated, and the eviction proceedings were not barred on that ground.

Ratio Decidendi: An issue conclusively decided at an earlier stage of the same proceeding and allowed to attain finality cannot be reopened at a later stage, as res judicata applies between stages of the same litigation.

---