AJAY KUMAR BHAGAT Vs. OM PRAKASH BHAGAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned counsel for the appellant as well as learned counsel for the respondents. Perused the material on record.

(2.) The present second appeal is preferred by the appellant, being aggrieved and dissatisfied by the judgment and decree dated 15th March, 2007 passed in Title (Partition) Suit No. 41 of 2003, by the Court of learned Sub-ordinate Judge, 01st, Pakur, whereby the suit filed by the appellant herein (plaintiff) has been dismissed and the appellant (plaintiff) has been directed to vacate the suit premises described in Schedule B of the counter claim and to hand over the possession of the same to the respondent herein (defendant-1st party) within two months from the date of the order, failing which the respondent herein (defendant-1st party) given liberty to get the decree executed through process of law as well as the judgment and order dated 14th September, 2011 passed in Title Appeal No. 02 of 2007, delivered by the Court of the learned District Judge, Pakur, whereby the learned District Judge held that the impugned judgment and decree dated 15th March, 2007 and 26th March, 2007, respectively passed by the trial Court do not suffer from any illegality or infirmity and are affirmed. The learned Judge did not find any merit in the Title appeal and hence, it was ordered to be dismissed on contest with no order as to costs. Upon hearing the learned counsel for the appellant as well as the respondents herein and on perusal of the judgment and order passed by the learned Sub-ordinate Judge, 01st, Pakur in Title (Partition) Suit No. 41 of 2003 as well as the judgment and order passed by the learned District Judge, Pakur in Title Appeal No. 2 of 2007, it appears that there are concurrent finding of facts recorded by the Courts below. I have perused the judgments passed by the Courts below and on perusal of the same, it appears that both the Courts below have properly framed the issues/points for determination on the basis of the pleadings of the parties and both the Courts below have rightly and properly dealt with and decided the issues/points for determination framed in the suit as well as the appeal after careful consideration of the evidence on record. It appears that in the Title (Partition) Suit No. 41 of 2003, the learned Judge has framed issue No. III, as to whether the suit barred by the principle of res judicata and in Para 71 of the judgment, this issue has been discussed by the learned Judge, wherein, the learned Judge has rightly observed that the essentials for applicability of principles of res judicata are-