#LEARNINGTHELAW-31-WHAT IS ‘RATIO DECIDENDI’, ‘DICTUM’ AND 'OBITER DICTUM’; BINDING OF OBITER DICTUM Posted on August 29, 2020

By CA Dr. Arpit Haldia Page: 1 Email: [email protected] Scope of Obiter-Dictum-Mohandas Issardas And Ors. vs A.N. Sattanathan And Ors. on 9 August, 1954 Equivalent citations: AIR 1955 Bom 113, (1954) 56 BOMLR 1156, 1955 CriLJ 423, ILR 1955 Bom 319

Now, an 'obiter dictum' is an expression of opinion on a point which is not necessary for the decision of a case. This very definition draws a clear distinction between a point which is necessary for the determination of a case and a point which is not necessary for the determination of the case. But in both cases points must arise for the determination of the tribunal. Two questions may arise before a for its determination. The Court may determine both although only one of them may be necessary for the ultimate decision of the case. The question which was necessary for the determination of the case would be the 'ratio decidendi'; the opinion of the tribunal on the question which was not necessary to decide the case would be only an 'obiter dictum'.

Emphasis Supplied

Scope of Obiter-Dictum-U.P.Power Corporation ... vs Krishna Chandra Bhajpai And Ors. on 28 May, 2019

Obitar Dicta The latin term 'obitar dicta' means "things said by the way," and is generally used in to refer to an opinion or non-necessary remark made by a judge. In any , it contains two elements: (i) ratio decidendi, and (ii) obiter dicta. Ratio decidendi is the Latin term meaning "the reason for the decision," and refers to statements of the critical facts and law of the case. These are vital to the court's decision itself. Obiter dicta are additional observations, remarks, and opinions on other issues made by the judge. These often explain the court's rationale in coming to its decision and, while they may offer guidance in similar matters in the future.

Emphasis Supplied

Dictum or Obiter Dictum-Arun Kumar Aggarwal vs State Of M.P.& Ors on 2 September, 2011 (SC)

"Dictum" or "obiter dictum: is distinguished from the "holding of the court in that the so- called "law of the case" does not extend to mere dicta, and mere dicta are not binding under the doctrine of stare decisis, As applied to a particular opinion, the question of whether or not a certain part thereof is or is not a mere dictum is sometimes a matter of argument. And while the terms "dictum" and "obiter dictum" are generally used synonymously with regard to expressions in an opinion which are not necessary to support the decision, in connection with the doctrine of stare decisis, a distinction has been drawn between mere obiter and "judicial dicta," the latter being an expression of opinion on a point deliberately passed upon by the court."

Emphasis Supplied

Difference between a “holding”, “dictum” and “obiter dictum”- Arun Kumar Aggarwal vs State Of M.P.& Ors on 2 September, 2011 (SC)

By CA Dr. Arpit Haldia Page: 2 Email: [email protected] 190. Decision on legal point; effect of dictum- In applying the doctrine of stare decisis, a distinction is made between a holding and a dictum. Generally stare decisis does not attach to such parts of an opinion of a court which are mere dicta. The reason for distinguishing a dictum from a holding has been said to be that a question actually before the court and decided by it is investigated with care and considered in its full extent, whereas other principles, although considered in their relation to the case decided, are seldom completely investigated as to their possible bearing on other cases. Nevertheless have sometimes given dicta the same effect as holdings, particularly where "judicial dicta" as distinguished from "obiter dicta" are involved."

Emphasis Supplied

Example of Obiter dictum-Binding Precedent- M/S.Larsen And Toubro Ltd vs 1. State Of Andhra Pradesh Rep. By ... on 14 September, 2015 (Andhra Pradesh HC)

Even if the scope of Section 6(2) of the CST Act was not in issue in A&G Projects & Technologies Ltd, it is nonetheless binding as the High Court is bound even by the obiter-dicta of the . An obiter dictum, as distinguished from a ratio decidendi, is an observation by the Court on a legal question suggested in a case before it, but not arising in such manner as to require a decision. (State of Haryana v. Ranbir ; ADM, Jabalpur v. Shivakant Shukla ; Girnar Traders; Divisional Controller, KSRTC v. Mahadeva Shetty ; Director of Settlements, A.P. v. M.R. Apparao ). Obiter dicta of the Supreme Court is binding upon other courts in the country (Sanjay Dutt v. State through CBI, Bombay ) in the absence of a direct pronouncement on that question elsewhere by the Supreme Court (Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Meena Variyal ), and is entitled to considerable weight. (CIT v. Vazir Sultan & Sons ). We must express our inability to agree with the submission, urged on behalf of the petitioners, that the scope of Section 6(2), as analysed therein, need not be followed.

Emphasis Supplied

Binding Precedent of Obiter Dictum-U.P.Power Corporation ... vs Krishna Chandra Bhajpai And Ors. on 28 May, 2019

In Basant Kumar Pal v. The Chief Electrical Engineer and others; AIR 1956 Cal.93, it was held that 'even an obiter of the Supreme Court is binding upon the High Court only if the Supreme Court has enunciated or declared some principle of law'. In the case of Nurudin Ahmed v. State of Assam; AIR 1956 Asam 48; it was laid down that 'the observations of their Lordships of the Supreme Court if they were made obiter, would be entitled to the highest esteem from the High Court'.

By CA Dr. Arpit Haldia Page: 3 Email: [email protected]