https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=285363 Section 11 CPC confines res judicata to matters directly and substantially in issue between the same parties or their privies, and Sections 40 to 43 of the Evidence Act separately govern when prior judgments are conclusive or merely relevant evidence. A judgment against different defendants, not falling within the statutory categories of judgments in rem or conclusive judgments, cannot bar a stranger to that litigation from contesting title, nor can it be treated as conclusive proof simply because it decided the same title question earlier. The earlier decree therefore did not operate as res judicata against the Government, though it remained evidence on title, and the plaintiff could still prove his claim. en-us Wed, 13 Oct 1920 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 09 Jan 2020 10:13:47 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=285363 Section 11 CPC confines res judicata to matters directly and substantially in issue between the same parties or their privies, and Sections 40 to 43 of the Evidence Act separately govern when prior judgments are conclusive or merely relevant evidence. A judgment against different defendants, not falling within the statutory categories of judgments in rem or conclusive judgments, cannot bar a stranger to that litigation from contesting title, nor can it be treated as conclusive proof simply because it decided the same title question earlier. The earlier decree therefore did not operate as res judicata against the Government, though it remained evidence on title, and the plaintiff could still prove his claim. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 13 Oct 1920 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=285363