ISSUE:
Whether the suit was maintainable without the sanction of the Advocate General under Section 92 of the CPC?
Whether the suit was barred by the rule of res judicata under Section 11 of the CPC?
Whether the compromise decree in the earlier suit was binding on the public regarding the wakf property?
RULE:
The interpretation of a statute should begin with the plain meaning of its words, without reference to the prior state of law or the English law it may be based upon. However, when a legislative amendment aims to make substantial changes to the pre-existing law, the prior legal context must be considered to determine whether the language of the statute supports the intended change.
A suit under Section 92 CPC requires the sanction of the Advocate General only if it seeks reliefs specified in Subsection (1).
The rule of res judicata applies to representative suits, but only if the suit maintains its original representative nature.
A decree passed by consent in a representative suit binds only consenting parties, not the public at large.