Mandate of sc judgments.

Article 141 of The Constitution of India states that, the law declared by the Supreme Court shall be binding on all courts within the territory of India.

The general principles laid down by the Supreme Court are applicable to each individual including those who are not party to an order this was held in the case of Ganga Sagar Corporation v. State of Uttar Pradesh, (A.I.R. 1980 S.C. 286.)

This concept exists in Common Law countries which, in common parlance, is known as the law of precedents. In the absence of codified laws, the concept of law of precedents evolved in England, and was later adopted in Indian law as well. Section 212 of the Government of India Act, 1935 provided that law declared by the federal court and any judgment of the Privy Council shall, as far as applicable, be recognized as binding and shall be followed by all courts in British India. When the Constitution of India was enacted, the law makers inserted Article 141.

It has been held in Patil Vijay Kumar Vs. CIT (1985) 48 CTR (Kar) 41 that a High Court is not found by the decision of any other High Court. A High Court’s decision will only be binding on the same High Court and the Courts and Tribunals over which it exercises jurisdiction.

In CIT Vs. Thane Electricity Supply Ltd. (1994) 206 ITR 727 the following observations were made by the Bombay High Court:

The law declared by the Supreme Court being binding on all courts in India, the decisions of the Supreme Court are binding on all courts, except, however, the Supreme Court itself which is free to review the same and depart from its earlier opinion if the situation so warrants. That is binding is, of course, the ratio of the decision and not every expression found therein.

The decisions of the High Court are binding on the subordinate courts and authorities or Tribunals under its superintendence throughout the territories in relation to which it exercises jurisdiction. It does not extend beyond its territorial jurisdiction.

However the decisions of a high court is not binding on tribunals outside its jurisdiction.

In Suganthi Suresh Kumar Vs. Jagdeeshan (2002)2 SCC 420 Supreme Court observed that, "It is impermissible for a High Court to overrule the decision of the Apex Court on the ground that the Supreme Court laid down legal position without considering any other point. High Court cannot question the correctness of the decision of the Supreme Court even though the point sought before the High Court."

In the case of East India commercial Co. Ltd. V. collector of Customs, Calcutta (AIR 1962 SC 1893). The Supreme Court, on consideration of Articles 215, 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India came to the conclusion that the cumulative effect of the above noted provisions of the Constitution is that the decisions of the High Court have binding effect upon the subordinate judiciary and the tribunals.

In AIR 1994 Allahabad 371, Jagdish Narain v. Chief Controlling Revenue Authority, the same view has been taken. Article 227 of the Constitution also provides that the High Courts can frame regulation for the proper guidance of the subordinate judiciary.

References –

https://ijtr.nic.in/articles/art31.pdf

https://www.barandbench.com/columns/observations-made-by-the-supreme-court-in-a-judgment-binding-or-not#:~:text=Article%20141%20provides%20that%20the,which%2C%20the%20case%20is%20decided.