https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=276356 The High Court held that previous judgments would operate as res judicata for issues of fact but not for pure questions of law in subsequent proceedings involving different properties. Illegitimate sons were found entitled to inherit property under Hindu law. The Court distinguished between res judicata and estoppel, affirming that the former applies to issues of fact and mixed questions of law and fact. The Supreme Court upheld the High Court's decision, emphasizing that res judicata does not prevent courts from deciding pure questions of law differently in cases involving different properties and causes of action. Appeals were dismissed, affirming the distinction between res judicata and estoppel. en-us Fri, 06 May 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 08 Nov 2018 10:57:12 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=276356 The High Court held that previous judgments would operate as res judicata for issues of fact but not for pure questions of law in subsequent proceedings involving different properties. Illegitimate sons were found entitled to inherit property under Hindu law. The Court distinguished between res judicata and estoppel, affirming that the former applies to issues of fact and mixed questions of law and fact. The Supreme Court upheld the High Court's decision, emphasizing that res judicata does not prevent courts from deciding pure questions of law differently in cases involving different properties and causes of action. Appeals were dismissed, affirming the distinction between res judicata and estoppel. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 06 May 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=276356