https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=174731 A suit for recovery of possession of public trust property must comply with the statutory procedure governing public trust litigation, and recasting the claim as one for declaration with consequential possession does not avoid that bar; where the asserted status arose decades earlier, such a claim is also barred by limitation. The text further notes that, although strict res judicata may not apply if the earlier proceeding did not involve the same party, a prior final determination on the validity of Shivalingayya's nomination and installation as Padadayya could not be ignored and should not have been reopened to reach a contrary finding. en-us Tue, 21 Mar 1995 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 17 Oct 2015 10:18:18 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=174731 A suit for recovery of possession of public trust property must comply with the statutory procedure governing public trust litigation, and recasting the claim as one for declaration with consequential possession does not avoid that bar; where the asserted status arose decades earlier, such a claim is also barred by limitation. The text further notes that, although strict res judicata may not apply if the earlier proceeding did not involve the same party, a prior final determination on the validity of Shivalingayya's nomination and installation as Padadayya could not be ignored and should not have been reopened to reach a contrary finding. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 21 Mar 1995 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=174731