( 1 ) THE short point arising for consideration in these revision petitions is whether the doctrine of res judicata operates as a bar to the maintainability of these actions. The suits are instituted by the Srikakulam Municipality represented by its Special Officer and Secretary and are laid against the same defendant for recovery of property tax due in respect of several items of property for the ear 1962-63 and 1963-64. The main defence is that the suits are bared because of earlier decisions in respect of the identical claims. Formerly suits were brought by the Municipal Council against the defendant for recovery of arrears of tax levied by it on the very same item of property. The suits related to the three years 1961-61 to 1963-64. The plaintiff succeeded in the suits but the defendant preferred appeals form the decrees of the trial court. The appeals related only to the two later years. The decree in respect of the first year was not the subject-matter of the appeal in any of the cases.

( 2 ) THE appeals were allowed and the suits dismissed on the ground that the sanction of the Municipal Council was not obtained before their institution and consequently they