In Brief
The appellant, a co-owner of family property, filed a partition suit in 1988 after an earlier 1962 possession suit was dismissed. The High Court dismissed the partition suit on grounds of res judicata and adverse possession. The Supreme Court held that successive suits are not barred by res judicata when based on different causes of action: the 1962 suit sought possession based on a settlement deed, while the 1988 suit sought partition based on birth right as co-owner. The Court rejected the adverse possession defense, holding that co-owners cannot claim adverse possession against each other without clear evidence of open denial of title and ouster. The Court partitioned the property 35-65 between appellant and respondent to end decades of family dispute.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.