Case title:Secunderabad Club vs CIT | 2023 LiveLaw (SC) | 2023 INSC 736 dated 17/08/2023
The court made the following observations regarding the concept of ratio decidendi and binding:
๐What is binding in terms of Article 141 of the constitution is the ratio of the judgment and as already noted, the ratio decidendi of a judgment is the reason assigned in support of the conclusion.
๐The reasoning of a judgment can be discerned only upon reading of a judgment in its entirety and the same has to be culled out thereafter. The ratio of the case has to be deduced from the facts involved in the case and the particular provision(s) of law which the court has applied or interpreted, and the decision has to be read in the context of the particular statutory provisions involved in the matter.
๐An order made merely to dispose of the case cannot have the value or effect of a binding precedent.
๐Although the obiter dictum of the Supreme Court is binding on all courts, it has only persuasive authority as far as the Supreme Court itself is concerned.
๐The decision is an authority for what is specifically decides and not what can logically be deduced therefrom.
๐Declaration of the law by the Supreme Court can be said to have been made only when it is contained in a speaking order, either expressly or by necessary implication and not by dismissal in limine.
๐The precedential value of an order of the supreme court of India which is not preceded by a detailed judgment would be lacking inasmuch as an issue would not have been categorically dealt with order is binding on the parties to the said order, but in our view, it cannot act as a precedent for subsequent cases such as the present one with which we are dealing.
๐If an order of this Court is brief and meant only for the purpose of closure of the controversy involved in a particular case and with a view to conclude the case, undoubtedly, such an order is binding on the parties to the said order, but in our view, it cannot act as a precedent for subsequent cases such as the present one with which we are dealing.
๐The precedential value of an order of the Supreme Court which is not preceded by a detailed judgment would be lacking inasmuch as an issue would not have been categorically dealt with.
This website has been designed only for the purposes of dissemination of basic information on ADROIT; information which is otherwise available on the internet, various public platforms and social media. Careful attention has been given to ensure that the information provided herein is accurate and up-to-date.
This website is not an attempt to advertise or solicit clients and does not seek to create or invite any lawyer-client relationship. The links provided on this website are to facilitate access to basic information on ADROIT, and, to share the various thought leadership initiatives undertaken by it. The content herein or on such links should not be construed as a legal reference or legal advice. Readers are advised not to act on any information contained herein or on the links and should refer to legal counsels and experts in their respective jurisdictions for further information and to determine its impact.
