Affluence Advisory
Quick Summary
In a recent judgment of Jharkhand HC, the captioned principle has been discussed at length. A summary of the same is as below: SRI GOPIKRISHNA INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD. ORS. VERSUS THE STATE OF JHARKHAND [2024 (4) TMI 851, JHARKHAND HIGH COURT] Brief Background of the Case In the said case,
Daily Limit Reached
You have reached your daily limit of 2 Free Articles
Subscribe to CCI PRO for unlimited access
Why Upgrade to CCI PRO?
- No Ads
- WhatsApp Broadcasts
- Daily E-Newsletter
- Unlimited Articles Access
BEST VALUE
2 YEAR PLAN
3,499
(Inclusive of GST)
1 YEAR PLAN
1,999
(Inclusive of GST)
View all CCI PRO benfits
Already a PRO member? Login here for an ad-free experience.
FAQ :
The doctrine of merger suggests that when the Supreme Court dismisses a Special Leave Petition (SLP) at the threshold (in limine), the High Court's order does not merge with the Supreme Court's dismissal order. The aggrieved party can still seek review of the High Court's judgment.
No, if the Supreme Court dismisses an SLP based on factual aspects without delving into the merits or question of law, the High Court's judgment on those facts remains significant and can be followed by coordinate benches.
Generally, coordinate benches should follow decisions of other coordinate benches to maintain judicial discipline and consistency. If a judge believes a prior decision needs reconsideration, the case should be referred to a Division Bench or a larger bench.
If the Supreme Court dismisses an SLP in limine and leaves the question of law open, it implies that the specific factual findings of the High Court are not being disturbed, but the broader legal issue is not settled by the Supreme Court.
The contractor firms in the Sri Gopikrishna Infrastructure case were allowed reimbursement of GST paid on raw materials, along with statutory interest, as the High Court's decision, affirmed by the Supreme Court's dismissal of the SLP on factual grounds, was binding on the coordinate bench.
CAclubindia
