Judicial precedents on splitting of causes of action have firmly established that litigants must present all claims arising from a single transaction or series of connected facts within one suit. Landmark rulings such as Mohammad Khalil Khan v. Mahbub Ali Mian (1949) and Gurbux Singh v. Bhooralal (1964) in India clarified that filing multiple suits for parts of the same cause violates Order II Rule 2 of the Civil Procedure Code, as it constitutes an abuse of judicial process and invites dismissal of subsequent claims. Similarly, in common law jurisdictions, courts have consistently held that cause-splitting undermines the doctrine of res judicata and the efficient administration of justice. Best lawyers rely on these precedents not only to avoid procedural errors but also to strengthen their arguments in complex litigation. They cite these cases strategically to persuade courts that their client’s claims arise from distinct causes or to demonstrate procedural diligence in consolidating suits. By aligning their approach with judicially established principles, skilled lawyers ensure compliance, credibility, and a stronger footing in litigation strategy.
