HITENDRA BORKAR Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ON perusal of the record would show that the petitioner for the same cause of action on an earlier occasion had filed a petition that was registered as W.P.(S) 6308/09 which was dismissed by this Court holding it to be devoid of merit on 04 -11 -2009. Now, by way of the present writ petition, the petitioner has again challenged the same cause of action with slight modification in the writ petition and the grounds raised therein.

(2.) IT is settled position of law that a litigant does not have a right to approach the Court time and again for the same cause of action by only changing grounds each time. All possible grounds ought to have been raised or challenged at the first instance. The litigant not doing so would not be permitted to reagitate the same cause of action repeatedly by only changing grounds each time. The issue which has been challenged once and which stands decided should not be allowed to reopen and reagitate only on the ground that the petitioner at the first instance could not take or raise certain grounds which he has now done in the subsequent writ petition. If such a system and principle is to be permitted then there will be no end to litigation and the judicial pronouncement passed earlier would have no binding effect and it is precisely for this reason the principle of res judicata was adopted and is applied. The Supreme Court on the said issue of res judicata, in the case of State of Karnataka and another v. All India Manufacturers Organisation and others reported in : (2006) 4 SCC 683 : (AIR 2006 SC 1846), has held as under:

(3.) SIMILAR view has also been taken by the Supreme Court in the case of Escorts Farms Ltd. previously known as M/s. Escorts Farms (Ramgarh) Ltd. v. Commissioner, Kumaon Division, Nainital, U.P. and others reported in : (2004) 4 SCC 281: (AIR 2004 SC 2186) wherein also the Supreme Court while dealing with the issue of res judicata has held as under: