Supreme Court of India

Mathura Prasad Bajoo Jaiswal v Dossibai N.B. Jeejeebhoy

AIR 1971 SC 2355; (1970) 3 SCR 83019701 min read
The case in brief30-second read
Facts
In an earlier proceeding between the parties, the court held that the Bombay Rent Act did not apply to open land let for building purposes, and so declined to fix a standard rent. The same question arose again in a later application between the same parties.
Issue
Whether an earlier decision on a pure question of law, relating to the jurisdiction of the court, operates as res judicata.
Held
A question of law unrelated to facts which gives rise to a right, such as a decision that wrongly assumes or refuses jurisdiction, or one that sanctions something prohibited by law, does not operate as res judicata. Otherwise a wrong decision on jurisdiction would confer or take away jurisdiction contrary to the statute.
Principle
A decision on a pure question of law relating to jurisdiction, or contrary to statute, is not res judicata.
Cite this

Facts

  • In an earlier proceeding between the parties, the court held that the Bombay Rent Act did not apply to open land let for building purposes, and so declined to fix a standard rent. The same question arose again in a later application between the same parties.

Issue

  1. Whether an earlier decision on a pure question of law, relating to the jurisdiction of the court, operates as res judicata.

Held

  • A question of law unrelated to facts which gives rise to a right, such as a decision that wrongly assumes or refuses jurisdiction, or one that sanctions something prohibited by law, does not operate as res judicata. Otherwise a wrong decision on jurisdiction would confer or take away jurisdiction contrary to the statute.

Cite this

Citation

Mathura Prasad Bajoo Jaiswal v Dossibai N.B. Jeejeebhoy AIR 1971 SC 2355; (1970) 3 SCR 830

Reported: https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1006709/. This is an educational summary, not the judgment itself. Cite the reported version in professional or academic work.