SC: Clarity of Judgment Must to Avoid Dilemma

The Supreme Court on Friday suggested that its judges should explicitly clarify in their rulings whether a decision resolves a specific dispute or establishes a binding legal precedent, as it highlighted the distinction between its twin roles as the apex appellate authority and as a precedent-setting body.

- Utkarsh Anand

NEW DELHI:

Underlining the necessity for clarity in its judgments to avoid dilemmas for subordinate courts, a bench of Justices PS Narasimha and Pankaj Mithal emphasized that while the top court often decides individual cases under its appellate jurisdiction, not every ruling constitutes a binding precedent under Article 141 of the Constitution.

"As an institution, our Supreme Court performs the twin functions of decision-making and precedent-making...It is therefore necessary to be cautious in our dispensation and state whether a particular decision is to resolve the dispute between the parties and provide finality or whether the judgment is intended to and in fact declares the law under Article 141," held the judgment, penned by Justice Narasimha.

The judgment came as the bench referred a legal conundrum concerning Section 18 of the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises (MSME) Act, 2006, to a larger three-judge bench for authoritative determination.