The correct answer is (b), Daryao Vs. State of U.P.
The doctrine of res judicata is a legal principle that prevents a party from relitigating an issue that has already been decided by a court of competent jurisdiction. In the case of Daryao Vs. State of U.P., the Supreme Court held that the doctrine of res judicata applied to writ petitions. This means that a party cannot file a writ petition challenging a decision that has already been made by a court of competent jurisdiction.
The other options are incorrect because they do not deal with the doctrine of res judicata. Option (a), L.I.C, Vs. India Automobiles & Company, is a case about the liability of an insurer. Option (c), Bhula Bhai Vs. State of MP, is a case about the right to property. Option (d), Premier Automobile Vs. Kamlakar, is a case about the liability of a manufacturer.