Sri Lankappa & Ors. v. Karnataka Industrial Corporation & Ors.
Background
A family claimed ownership of about 11 acres of agricultural land in Bangalore inherited from their grandfather, while Karnataka Industrial Corporation (KIC) claimed the same land under a 1968 government grant. In earlier rounds of litigation spanning decades, courts repeatedly held that KIC's grant stood "deemed cancelled" and that the family was in lawful possession, and the Supreme Court itself had earlier dismissed KIC's appeal, making that finding final. Years later, KIC filed a fresh suit claiming absolute ownership of the same land, which the trial court rejected as barred by the earlier decisions, but the High Court revived it.
Decision Breakdown
The Supreme Court held that although KIC's first suit had sought only an injunction, the question of title had already been squarely and finally decided against KIC in the earlier litigation, including by the Supreme Court itself. Relying on the doctrine of res judicata and its own precedent in Anathula Sudhakar, the Court held that KIC could not relitigate ownership of the same property based on the same (already-cancelled) grant. The High Court's order reviving KIC's second suit was therefore set aside, and the trial court's rejection of that suit was restored.
Lesson Learnt
Once a court has finally decided an issue like ownership of property between the same parties, a litigant cannot repeatedly file fresh suits to reargue the same point: the principle of res judicata exists precisely to prevent endless relitigation of settled questions.