https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=283157 A tenant who failed to raise an available Section 106 defence in earlier rent control and Section 72B proceedings was held barred from invoking it later, because the omission attracted constructive res judicata under Explanation IV to Section 11 CPC and also amounted to waiver. The court also noted that a reference under Section 125(3) of the Kerala Land Reforms Act is required only when a live tenancy question properly arises for decision; where the tenant had already foregone the statutory defence that would have triggered reference, he could not later insist on a mandatory referral. The civil court was therefore competent to proceed without reference. en-us Wed, 30 Mar 1994 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 10 Sep 2019 16:13:05 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=283157 A tenant who failed to raise an available Section 106 defence in earlier rent control and Section 72B proceedings was held barred from invoking it later, because the omission attracted constructive res judicata under Explanation IV to Section 11 CPC and also amounted to waiver. The court also noted that a reference under Section 125(3) of the Kerala Land Reforms Act is required only when a live tenancy question properly arises for decision; where the tenant had already foregone the statutory defence that would have triggered reference, he could not later insist on a mandatory referral. The civil court was therefore competent to proceed without reference. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 30 Mar 1994 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=283157