legal maxim

The Latin phrase Ratio Decidendi means “the reason behind the decision”. While pronouncing any judgement, it is the duty of the Court to back their decisions with proper reasoning and substantiation, this constitutes the Ration Decidendi. Every precedent consists of the Obiter Dicta and the Ratio Decidendi. However, it is only the latter which is binding on all the Courts. It must be noted that the reason behind the judgement of a particular case forms the Descripttive ratio Decidendi and an idea as to how to use the particular precedent in the future forms that Perspective Ratio Decidendi.

Osborne v. Rowlett

In this case, it was made clear that it is only the Ratio Decidendi which constitutes the precedent in a case and nothing else.

Minerva Mills v. Union of India

In this case, it was held that no matter the number of dissenting opinions, the case will always be treated as a precedent as long as its Ratio Decidendi has the majority.

Pradip Chandra Parija v. Pramod Chandra Patnaik

In this case, it was held that a Ratio Decidendi can only be overruled by a higher court or a larger bench.

B. Sharma Rao v. UT of Pondicherry

While following any precedent, it should be noted that the rationale behind the judgement and the methods implied so as to reach that particular judgement holds more important. All the cases have different facts and circumstances, thus following one decision for all the cases is useless, however, the methods to reach the conclusion and the reasons behind that conclusion is always helpful in deciding future cases.