https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=172222 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. en-us Mon, 04 Dec 1995 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 14 Aug 2015 16:56:57 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=172222 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. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 04 Dec 1995 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=172222