Final adjudication binds parties despite later claim that initiating proceedings were void; reopening the dispute was impermissible.

An order that has attained finality between the same parties cannot be disregarded merely because the initiating proceedings were later described as void or invalid. Until set aside, such an order continues to operate inter partes and binds the parties. The later characterisation of the initiation defect did not displace the effect of the earlier final revisional order, which had already concluded the controversy on impleadment and the tenancy claim. On that basis, the subsequent Board action reopening the matter and allowing impleadment was without legal foundation and could not override the final adjudication.

---

---

Issues: Whether the earlier order rejecting impleadment and negativing the tenancy claim, as affirmed in revision, could be ignored because a later revision described the initiating proceedings as void; and whether the Board could thereafter reopen the matter and allow impleadment in favour of the claimants.

Analysis: The earlier order between the same parties had attained finality and concluded the controversy. The later observation that the initiating proceedings were void did not destroy the legal effect of the final adjudication already rendered inter partes. A void or invalid order is not treated as non-existent for all purposes; until it is set aside, it continues to operate between the parties. The Court also treated the defect in initiation as not fundamental enough to displace the final revisional order. On that basis, the later impleadment and the acceptance of the tenancy plea were impermissible.

Conclusion: The earlier final order bound the parties and could not be ignored; the subsequent Board orders were without legal foundation and had to be annulled, in favour of the appellant.

Final Conclusion: The appeal succeeded because the final revisional decision between the parties controlled the controversy, and the later proceedings could not reopen or override it.

Ratio Decidendi: An order that has attained finality between the parties cannot be disregarded in later proceedings merely because the earlier initiation was later described as void or invalid; until set aside, such an order remains effective inter partes and binds the parties.

---