9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (7) TMI 809X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e decided by a single order. Against the appellate order, several appeals were filed before the Tribunal. Those were dealt with by a common order by the Tribunal. Thus, whereas there were several assessment orders against each of the respondent-assessees in respect of their employees, there was one common appellate order in respect of each of the respondent-assessees although there were several appeals and, at the same time, there was one common order of the Tribunal in respect of each of the assessees despite there being several appeals before the Tribunal. Aggrieved by those four several orders of the Tribunal, four appeals, presently being dealt with, have been filed by the Department and not several appeals. For that reason, an objectio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l relate to each individual case though the order might dispose of more than one. It held that when more than one appeal or suit are disposed of by a common judgment the order pursuant to the common judgment affects each individual case/appeal and, as such, there cannot be one appeal against a consolidated order. It was, however, declared that the practice and procedure followed so long by reason of the direction dated February 3, 1992 by the Division Bench should be treated as an addition to the rules made by the High Court in relation to preferring of appeals and cannot be questioned. It held that such practice cannot be followed ipso facto in the case of appeals under section 260A of the Act in view of the basic difference in jurisdictio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... land. Each sued the other for declaration that she was the exclusive owner of that land and the other had no right to it of any kind. Both the suits were disposed of by a single judgment, which decided that one widow was the owner and the other widow was entitled to hold possession of half of the land in lieu of maintenance. Separate decrees were drawn up in each suit. One of the widows appealed against the decree given in the suit filed by her. At the hearing of that appeal, it was contended that the appeal is not maintainable for not preferring an appeal against the other decree, in which the appellant was the defendant, as that decree operates as res judicata. The court held that the determining factor is not the decree, but the decisio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ourt. An objection was raised stating that four appeals, and not two, should have been filed. The hon'ble Supreme Court repelled the contention. Similar view has also been expressed in Chandra Bhan Gosain v. State of Orissa [1963] 50 ITR 195 (SC). 8. The judgments referred to above, we are of the view that if, by conduct, appeals are consolidated at the appellate stage and the appellate authority is invited to render one judgment to dispose of all the appeals by a common judgment, may be several decrees/orders are required to be passed to dispose of those appeals, but since each of them would be supported by the common judgment, in the event, the common judgment is interfered with, those orders would lose their soul and would collap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
