D ANANDA MURTHY Vs. G ANASUYAMMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Respondent No.1 filed O.S.No.744 of 2008 in the Court of the III Additional Junior Civil Judge, Kadapa against the petitioner and respondent Nos.2 and 3, initially, for the relief of perpetual injunction. Thereafter, the prayer in the suit was amended to be the one for declaration of title and recovery of possession of the suit schedule property. The petitioner, who happens to be defendant No.1, filed I.A.No.310 of 2009 under Order VII Rule 11 C.P.C. with a prayer to reject the plaint. Through its order, dated 10.11.2009, the trial Court dismissed the I.A. Hence, this revision.

(2.) Sri L.J.Veera Reedy, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that his client secured possession of the suit schedule property through execution of the decree in O.S.No.1108 of 2007 on the file of the very trial Court and in that view of the matter, the suit filed by respondent No.1 is barred by res judicata.

(3.) The only basis on which the petitioner seeks rejection of the plaint in O.S.No.744 of 2008 is that respondent No.1 is precluded from pleading contrary to the decree in O.S.No.1108 of 2007. In a way, he invokes the principle/doctrine of res judicata.