Even Brief Judgments Of Supreme Court Passed After Grant Of Special Leave Are Binding Precedents: SC [Read Judgment]

The Supreme Court has observed that its judgments which are passed in exercise of appellate jurisdiction are binding precedents, even if they are brief.

After the grant of special leave, the order impugned before the Supreme Court becomes an order appealed against and any order passed thereafter would be an appellate order and attract the doctrine of merger despite the fact that the order, speaking or non-speaking one, is of reversal or of modification or of affirming the order appealed against, the bench comprising Justice AM Khanwilkar and Justice Ajay Rastogi observed in S.E. Graphites Private Limited vs. State of Telangana.

The bench  was considering an appeal against a judgment of the High Court which had dismissed some writ petitions following the decision of the coordinate bench of the High Court in Ankamma Trading Company Vs. Appellate Deputy Commissioner (CT), Guntur & Anr. and other decisions taking the same view, despite noticing that it has been impliedly overruled by the Supreme Court in M/s. Innovatives Systems, Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh. The case involves interpretation of the provisions of APGST Act, 1957 or AP VAT Act, 2005 or Telangana State VAT Act, 2005,

Relying on the judgment in Kunhayammed Vs. State of Kerala, the appellant contended that once a special leave petition has been granted, the doors of the appellate jurisdiction of this Court have been let open and any order passed thereafter would be an appellate order and would attract the applicability of doctrine of merger. Further, it would not make a difference whether the order is one of reversal or of modification or of dismissal, or of affirming the order appealed against and it would also not make any difference if the order is a speaking or a non-speaking one, it was argued.

The respondent, defended the judgment of the High court contending that the judgment in M/s. Innovatives Systems neither refers to any specific provision nor has it expressly over turned the decision of the Division Bench of the High Court in Ankamma Trading Company. Rejecting this contention, the bench said:

Indeed, the decision of this Court in M/s. Innovatives Systems (supra), is a  brief judgment. That, however, would make no difference. For, it is well established that once a special leave petition has been granted, the doors for the exercise of appellate jurisdiction of this Court have been let open. Resultantly, the order impugned before the Supreme Court became an order appealed against and any order passed thereafter would be an appellate order and attract the doctrine of merger despite the fact that the order is of reversal or of modification or of affirming the order appealed against and including is a speaking or non-speaking one. This legal position has been restated in Kunhayammed (supra). Having said this, we must reject the argument of the respondent-State that the decision of this Court in M/s. Innovatives Systems (supra), and other decisions following the same, cannot be considered as binding precedent 

Click here to Download Judgment

Read Judgment