https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=172682 The earlier civil decree did not bar reconsideration of the 23.04.1969 allotment because the civil court lacked jurisdiction under Section 259 of the Land Revenue Act. A decree passed without jurisdiction is a nullity, coram non judice, and cannot operate as res judicata. The restoration of 460.15 bighas of land was also beyond the PHED's authority, because power over such land vested in the Revenue Department. As the allotment had not been validly examined on merits by a competent forum, the matter had to be determined afresh by the competent Revenue authority. en-us Thu, 11 Aug 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 28 Oct 2015 09:11:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=172682 The earlier civil decree did not bar reconsideration of the 23.04.1969 allotment because the civil court lacked jurisdiction under Section 259 of the Land Revenue Act. A decree passed without jurisdiction is a nullity, coram non judice, and cannot operate as res judicata. The restoration of 460.15 bighas of land was also beyond the PHED's authority, because power over such land vested in the Revenue Department. As the allotment had not been validly examined on merits by a competent forum, the matter had to be determined afresh by the competent Revenue authority. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 11 Aug 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=172682