What is a Judgement?

A Judgement is defined under Section 2(9) of the CPC as “the statement given by the judge on the grounds of a
decree or order.” In simpler terms, a judgement is the judge’s reasoning behind the court’s final decision in a
civil suit. It is the final expression of the court’s opinion on the matter after hearing the arguments, examining
the evidence and considering the applicable laws.
A judgement is delivered after the court has heard both parties and it forms the basis for issuing a decree or
order. A judgement must include a concise statement of the facts of the case, the points for determination, the
decisions on those points and the reasoning behind those decisions

What is a Decree? -A Decree is defined under Section 2(2) of the CPC as the formal expression of an
adjudication by a civil court, which conclusively determines the rights of the parties in relation to all or
any of the matters in controversy in a suit. Simply put, a decree is the official declaration of the court’s
decision regarding the rights and obligations of the parties involved in a lawsuit. A decree is issued
after the judgement has been delivered and it can be either preliminary or final. A decree
must be formally drawn up and must align with the judgement passed by the court.

What is an Order? An Order is defined under Section 2(14) of the CPC as the formal expression of
any decision of a civil court which is not a decree. Orders are issued by courts in response to
applications made by parties during the course of a suit or proceeding. Unlike decrees, which
conclusively determine the substantive rights of parties, orders typically deal with procedural matters
or interlocutory decisions.
Key Differences Between Judgement and Decree

1. Judgement is the statement which particularizes the grounds and reasons for the decision by the
Court, concerning the respective rights and liabilities of the parties to suit. On the contrary,
Decree refers to the legal expression of adjudication, wherein the Court expressing it beyond
any doubt states the rights and claims of the parties, concerning the matters of dispute in the
lawsuit.
2. Judgement is defined in Section 2(9) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. Conversely, Decree is
defined in Section 2(2) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.
3. Judgement is always final, whereas decree can be preliminary when further proceedings are
required before the conclusion of the suit or it can be final. A decree can also be partly
preliminary and partly final.
4. Judgement is the concluding part of a civil suit, which is followed by a decree which is its
operating part, stating the rights and duties of the parties involved in the case. So, the decree
should be in conformity with the judgement given.
5. Judgement is passed in both civil and criminal cases, whereas Decree is given in civil cases only.
6. Once the case is heard the judgement is pronounced by the court and on that judgement, the
decree is followed. So, judgement represents the stage occurring before decree or order is
passed and once the judgement is pronounced, decree follows.
7. The formal expression of judgement is not necessary but it is desirable, however, formal
expression of the decree is mandatory.
8. The decree is appealable, whereas judgement is not appealable.
9. Execution means the enforcement of the decrees. A decree can be executed in two ways, i.e.
either by the court which passed the judgement or by the court to which the decree is sent for
the purpose of execution. On the other hand, judgement is not executed.

Difference between Decree and Order: - A decree originates from a suit commenced by presenting a plaint, an
order is passed in a suit that may be instituted upon the presentation of either a plaint, an application, or a
petition.

A decree is an adjudication that conclusively determines the rights of the parties in a suit, an order may or may
not finally determine the rights of the parties. A decree may be preliminary or final but there is no such
classification in an order.

Every decree is appealable whereas the only orders that are specified in Section 104 and Order XLIII of the Code
are appealable. A second appeal lies to the High Court in the case of a decree if there is some substantial
question of law involved therein whereas no second appeal lies at all even in the case of appealable orders.
 The case Balraj Taneja v. Sunil Madan, (1999) 8 SCC 396, is a landmark judgment delivered by the Supreme
Court of India that dealt with procedural fairness and the importance of adhering to the principles of natural
justice in civil proceedings

Facts of the Case- The respondent, Sunil Madan, filed a suit for specific performance of a contract
against the appellant, Balraj Taneja. The appellant failed to file a written statement within the
prescribed time, and the trial court passed an ex parte decree in favor of the respondent solely based
on the plaintiff's pleadings.
The appellant challenged this decree, arguing that it was passed arbitrarily and violated procedural
fairness.

Foreign Judgment - Section 2(6) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) defines foreign Judgement.
It states that foreign Judgement means the Judgement of a foreign Court.As per Section 2(5) of
CPC, a foreign Court means a Court situated outside India and not established or continued by
the authority of the Central Government.

Foreign Judgment When Not Conclusive - Section 13 of CPC states that a foreign Judgement shall be
conclusive as to any matter thereby directly adjudicated upon between the same parties or between
parties under whom they or any of them claim litigating under the same title except—

o (a) where it has not been pronounced by a Court of competent jurisdiction; (b) where it has not been
given on the merits of the case; (c) where it appears on the face of the proceedings to be founded on
an incorrect view of international law or a refusal to recognize the law of India in cases in which such
law is applicable;
o (d) where the proceedings in which the Judgement was obtained are opposed to natural justice; (e)
where it has been obtained by fraud; (f) where it sustains a claim founded on a breach of any law in
force in India.
o
 This section provides that a foreign Judgement may operate as res judicata except in the
aforementioned six clauses.

(a) Foreign Judgment Not by a Competent Court - A Judgement of a foreign court to be conclusive
between the parties must be a Judgement pronounced by a court of competent jurisdiction.

In the case of Bharat Nidhi Limited v. Megh Raj Mahajan (1964), it was held that a foreign
Judgement has to be passed only by a foreign court of competent jurisdiction to operate as
res judicata in the Indian courts

Presumption as to Foreign Judgments - Section 14 states that the Court shall presume upon the
production of any document purporting to be a certified copy of a foreign Judgment, that such
Judgment was pronounced by a Court of competent jurisdiction, unless the contrary appears on the
record; but such presumption may be displaced by proving want of jurisdiction

What are the Provisions Related to Foreign Judgment in CPC? Section 13 of CPC

o As per Section 13 foreign judgment shall be conclusive as to any matter thereby directly adjudicated
upon between the same parties or between the parties under whom they or any of them claim litigating
under the same title.
o However there are certain exceptions to the rule laid down in Section 13. These are : 1-where it
has not been pronounced by a Court of competent jurisdiction; 2-where it has not been given on
the merits of the case; 3- where it appears on the face of the proceedings
o
 To be founded on an incorrect view of international law Or a refusal to recognize the law of India in
cases in which such law is applicable. -- where the proceedings in which the judgment was obtained
are opposed to natural justice;
 where it has been obtained by fraud; -- where it sustains a claim founded on a breach of any law in
force in India.
 Section 14 of CPC - lays down presumption regarding the foreign judgments.
o Section 14 lays down that the Court Shall Presume - Upon production of any document
purporting to be a certified copy of a foreign judgment
 That such judgment was pronounced by a Court of competent jurisdiction Unless contrary appears
from the record
 but such presumption may be displaced by proving want of jurisdiction.

 Section 44 A of CPC - provides for procedure of Execution of decrees passed by the Courts in
reciprocating territory. Section 44A (1) provides that : Where a certified copy of a decree of any of
the Superior Courts of any reciprocating territory has been filed In a District Court

The decree may be executed in India as if it had been passed by the District Court
o Section 44 A (2) provides that along with the certified copy of the decree a certificate from the
Superior Court shall also be filed, such certificate State the extent to which the decree has been
adjusted and satisfied
 It shall be conclusive proof of the extent of such satisfaction or adjustment.
o Section 44A (3) provides that: The provisions of Section 47 of CPC shall as from the filing of the
certified copy of the decree apply to the proceedings of the district Court executing a decree under this
Section and
 The District Court shall refuse execution of any such decree, if it is shown to the satisfaction of the
Court that the decree falls within any of the exceptions specified in clauses (a) to (f) of section 13.

 Section 11 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) embodies the doctrine of Res Judicata or the
rule of conclusiveness of a judgment. 2-It enacts that once a matter is finally decided by a competent
court, no party can be permitted to reopen it in a subsequent litigation. 3-It serves to prevent
multiplicity of proceedings and to protect parties from being vexed twice for the same cause.

Principles of Res Judicata

1. Nemo debet bis vexari pro una et eadem causa: This Latin proverb means “no man should
be vexed twice for the same cause”. The basic goal of Res Judicata is to save the parties from
having to go through endless litigation over the same problem. Once an issue has been
determined definitively by a competent court, the same parties should not be permitted to re-
litigate the same dispute.
2. Interest reipublicae ut sit finis litium: This Latin maxim means “it is in the best interests
of the State to put an end to litigation”. The Res Judicata concept enhances judicial
efficiency and the finality of rulings. It guarantees that disagreements are settled definitively,
lowering the pressure on the legal system and eliminating unnecessary and time-consuming
litigation.
3. Res judicata pro veritate occipitur: This Latin proverb translates as “a matter adjudged is
accepted as correct”. Res Judicata creates a presumption of validity and finality for decisions
made by competent courts. The court’s judgements are said to be founded on a thorough assessment
of the facts and law, and they should not be readily reversed.

Constructive Res Judicata: Explanation IV

• The rule of constructive Res Judicata engrafted in Explanation IV to Section 11 of the CPC.
Constructive means to be well within knowledge or that the party is well presumed to have a
particular fact in its mind at a particular point of time.
• Explanation IV to Section 11 says that any matter which might or ought to have been made
ground of defence or attack in a former suit shall be deemed to have been a matter
constructively in issue in that suit.
It is aimed at preventing not only the relitigating of issues that were decided in a previous suit but also
those issues that could have been raised and decided but were not.

Difference between Res-subjudice and Res-judicata

Res-subjudice - Object of res subjudice is to prevent two paraller litigations and avoid conflict of
judgments. 2- It is applicable where two suits are pending in the court of law for same matter of
 controversy. 3- By res subjudice is applicable if both suits involve same matter in controversy(all issue)
By res subjudice trail of subsequent suit is stayed.

Res-Judicata 1- Object of res judicata is to give finality to decision given by court. 2- It is applicable
where a suit is pending and matter in controversy is already decided in a formal suit 3- Res judicata is
applicable to suit (all issue) or to any issue of them 4-By res judicata , trail of subsequent suit is
barred.

 Daryao v. State of Uttar Pradesh (1961): The Supreme Court held that the rule of res
judicata applies also to a petition filed under article 32 of the constitution.
 State of U.P v. Nawab Hussain (1977): The Supreme Court held that the principle underlying
explanation IV is that where the parties have had an opportunity of controverting a matter that
should be taken to be the same thing as if the matter had been controverted and decied

Nemo debet bis vexari pro una et eadem causa: It means no man should be vexed twice for the
same cause. 2- Interest reipublicae ut sit finis litium: This maxim means it is in the interest of the
state that there should be an end to a litigation. 3- Res judicata pro veritate occipitur: a judicial
decision must be accepted as correct

Gulam Abbas v. State of U.P (1981) - The Supreme court held that the doctrine of res judicata
codified under Section 11 of CPC is not exhaustive.
Application of res judicata
 Matter in issue must be same: To apply the principle of Res Judicata, the matter in the
subsequent suit must be directly and substantially same in the former suit.
 Same Parties: The former suit must have been between the same parties, or between parties
under whom they or any of them claim.
 Same Title: The parties must be litigating under the same title in both the former and
subsequent suits.
 Competent Jurisdiction: The court that decided the former suit must have had jurisdiction to
try the subsequent suit or the suit in which the issue has been raised.
 Heard and Finally Decided: The matter in issue must have been heard and finally decided
by the former court.