Judgment in personam and judgment in rem:
The general rule is that a person is not bound by a transaction to which he was not a party. Res inter alias acte alteri nocere non debet. [A matter transacted between one set of persons ought not to injure or affect another person]. This rule equally applies where the transaction is a litigation, between strangers. Res inter alias judicata nullurn inter alias prejudicium facit. [A matter adjudicated upon between one set of parties in nowise prejudices another set of parties]. If there is one rule of law which is better known and approved than another, as being founded upon the most manifest justice and good sense, it is that no man ought to be bound by the decision of a Court of Justice unless he or those under whom he claim were parties to the proceedings in which it was given. [Per Garth, C.J. in Gajju Lal v. Fateh Lal, 6 C 171 (FB)]. This is on the principle that it would be unjust to bind any person by the result of litigation in which he could not be admitted to make a defence or to examine or cross-examine witnesses or to appeal from a judgment which he might think erroneous. [See the remarks of De Grey, C.J., in Duchess of Kingston’s case, 20 How St. Tr. 355, 544]. To this general rule, however, there are certain exceptions, of which the one enacted by the present section is perhaps the most important.
