https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=467835 A final writ decision under Article 226 determining whether consolidation authorities had jurisdiction between the same parties operates as res judicata at later stages of the same litigation, so the issue cannot be reopened before a subordinate consolidation authority. By contrast, a civil court's abatement order on a pure jurisdictional question does not itself conclude that issue as res judicata where the court's own competence depended on the same point. The governing principle is that a prior final writ determination binds the parties on the jurisdictional objection, and the matter cannot be re-agitated before the Deputy Director of Consolidation. en-us Thu, 27 Sep 1984 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 06 Apr 2026 13:21:25 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=467835 A final writ decision under Article 226 determining whether consolidation authorities had jurisdiction between the same parties operates as res judicata at later stages of the same litigation, so the issue cannot be reopened before a subordinate consolidation authority. By contrast, a civil court's abatement order on a pure jurisdictional question does not itself conclude that issue as res judicata where the court's own competence depended on the same point. The governing principle is that a prior final writ determination binds the parties on the jurisdictional objection, and the matter cannot be re-agitated before the Deputy Director of Consolidation. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 27 Sep 1984 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=467835