Tagged “might-and-ought”

Makardhwaj Ram v. Jagdish Rai (2026): constructive res judicata bars only what a party 'might AND ought' to have raised

The Supreme Court restored a decree for title and possession, holding that Explanation IV to Section 11 CPC bars only those grounds a plaintiff 'might and ought to have' raised earlier, judged by reasonable diligence against the ambit and nature of the earlier controversy — and that suits to cancel specific sale deeds did not oblige the owner to also litigate his undisputed title to the residual estate.