HIMAYAM ENGINEERS AND BUILDERS Vs. S. RAVICHANDRAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Brief facts:-

(2.) In the grounds of the memorandum of appeal, the appellant has specifically raised the following grounds:

(3.) Learned counsel appearing for the appellant submitted that the learned single Judge did not permit the parties to go into the issue on bar of the suit as envisaged under Order II Rule 2 of the Civil Procedure Code and no opportunity has been given to the appellant. However, after reserving the judgment, an additional issue has been framed and answered. Earlier, the respondents filed two applications - Application Nos.5412 and 5413 of 2005 seeking to revoke the leave granted to the appellant for institution of suit before this Court and for rejection of the plaint. Both the applications have been dismissed on merit. In the application 5413 of 2005, a specific plea has been raised basing reliance upon Order II Rule 2 C.P.C, which was negatived. An appeal was filed against the Order made in Application No.5412 of 2005 and not against Application No.5413 of 2005. The appeal filed was dismissed and in any case, the orders passed by the learned single Judge in the applications have become final. Therefore, it is not open to the learned single Judge to go into that issue once again on the principles governing the issue of estoppel and constructive res judicata. Learned counsel submitted that he is ready and willing to to go into the other issues on merit if required. In support of his contention, the learned counsel has made reliance upon the following judgments: