Res Judicata- a plea of res judicata can be given effect, it shall be provided that the litigating parties are the same, the subject matter of suits are identical; the matter must be finally decided between the parties and the suit must be decided by a Court of competent jurisdiction- there would be no res judicata in changed circumstances. (Para 16-18)
Summary: The primary issue in these appeals revolves around the Maharashtra Agricultural Lands (Ceiling on Holdings) Act, 1961, concerning declarations of surplus land holdings. The appellant’s argument centered on the erroneous inclusion of certain lands as surplus, which were allegedly forcibly taken by landlords. The original orders by the District Collector and subsequent tribunals found parts of the appellant’s land holdings to exceed ceiling limits, leading to legal disputes over several decades, involving multiple petitions and revisions. Key contentions include:The appellant’s claim that lands categorized under “dry crop land” were wrongly included as surplus due to changes in irrigation classifications.A plea against the reopening of past cases based on the principle of res judicata.Challenges against decisions made in favor of landlords under the Act’s Section 19.The Supreme Court dismissed the appeals, finding no merit in the appellant’s arguments. The judgment emphasized the finality of previous court decisions, and the lack of sufficient grounds to overturn these in light of res judicata and other legal principles.