9911796707
TMI Blog1960 (7) TMI 67X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a Full Bench of that High Court. It was there held that the binding nature of the precedents of one Court on another depended upon the fact whether such Courts are Courts of co-ordinate jurisdiction; and the Andhra High Court and the Madras High Court prior to 5-7-1954, it was held were Courts of co-ordinate jurisdiction. We found some difficulty in agreeing with some of the reasons which found favour with the learned judges who decided that case. We were, however, inclined to take the view though on a different ground, that the decisions of the High Court of Bombay should be binding on this Court provided they were given before 1-5-1960. Having regard to the importance of the question we felt the necessity of having it fully argued; and it was directed that the matter should be heard by a Full Bench of this Court. (2) The learned Advocate General has argued before us that the effect of S. 87 read with some other sections of the Bombay Reorganisation Act, 1960, is to make those decisions binding on this Court. He has principally relied on S. 87 of that Act which is as under:- "87. The provisions of Part II shall not be deemed to have effected any change in the territories t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... said territories shall cease to form part of the State of Bombay, and the residuary State of Bombay shall be known as the State of Maharashtra. (3) The villages in Umbergaon Taluka specified in Part I of the First Schedule shall form a separate Taluka of the same name and be included in Surat District, and the remaining villages in the said Taluka shall be included it, and form part of. Dahnu Taluka of Thana District; and the villages specified in Parts II and III of the First Schedule shall respectively be included in, and form part of Songadh Taluka of Surat District and Sahara Taluka of Broach District". Section 30 relates to the jurisdiction of the High Court of Gujarat which is as under:- "30. The High Court of Gujarat shall have, in respect of any part of the territories included in the State of Gujarat, all such jurisdiction, powers and authority as, under the law in force immediately before the appointed day, are exercisable in respect of that part of the said territories by the High Court of Bombay". The expression "law in force" appears in Ss. 32, 34, 35 and 36. Those sections deal respectively with practice and procedure in the High Court of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 87 of the Reorganisation Act, in our opinion, deals not merely with territorial extent of the new State but with territorial extent therein of laws in force immediately before the appointed day. It may be divided into two parts. The first part relates to the extent and application of laws in force immediately before the appointed day. The second part does not reach all the laws in force immediately before the appointed day but only such laws as contained any references to the territories and their territorial extent. Now the initial words of S. 87 refer to the provisions of Part II, Part II is initialed "Reorganisation of Bombay State" and contains three Sections. Section 3 which is the first section in that part has already been set out by us. Section 4 relates to amendment of the First Schedule to the Constitution and S. 5 relates to certain saving powers of the State Government. For all practical purposes it is S. 3 in Part II which is the material Section. It will conduce to clarity and simplicity when ascertaining the meaning and effect of S. 87, if we read S. 87 immediately after S. 3. But before we do so, we shall be referring to Ss. 3, 28 and 30 of the Act. Strip ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... se to be part of the State of Bombay and form a new State to be known as the State of Gujarat and S. 87 enacts that this formation of a new State and the cessation of the territories from the State of Bombay is not to effect "any change in the territories to which any law in force immediately before the appointed day extends or applies". The meaning of this first part of S. 87, in our judgment, must necessarily be that the territorial extent of those laws which were in force in all the territories of the State of Bombay immediately before the appointed day is to continue and the reorganization of the territories of the two States is not to effect any change in that position. (6) On our part we see no particular difficulty in interpreting the first part of S. 87. It may be that the intention of the legislature that the laws in force immediately before the appointed day in the State of Bombay are to continue to be in force in the territories which now form part of the State of Gujarat might have been expressed in a more satisfactory manner, if not in a more elegant manner. Even assuming that there is some ambiguity or uncertainty about the words used by the legislature in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rt find no difficulty in giving a comprehensive connotation to the expression "any law in force immediately before the appointed day". The words should not in our judgment, receive any technical meaning but should be understood in a sense which gives them a fair measure of amplitude. The crucial words so read must lead to the conclusion that decisions of the High Court of Bombay given before the appointed day are binding on this Court. It may be that some of those decisions may later on be overruled by that High Court. In any such case it would be open to this Court to decide and state for itself the law on the subject. No such position has arisen in the case before us and we need not linger longer on that aspect of the matter., One way of dealing with any such situation would be for a Full Bench of this High Court to consider the question and decide the matter for itself. Nor need we discuss the importance of judicial precedents and their place as the corpus juries. In any case we are of the opinions that judicial precedents are within the extensive ambit of S. 87 of the Act. (10) We turn to the second argument pressed for our acceptance by the learned Advocate General. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to the conclusion that smile because this Court is in a senses a successor to the High Court of Bombay in respect of the territories which now form part of the State of Gujarat, it is a Court of co-ordinate jurisdiction with that predecessor.
(11) It is lastly argued by the learned Advocate General that decisions of the Bombay High Court prior to the appointed date are binding on this Court because the systems of law in the new States of Maharashtra and Gujarat are derived from the parent State of Bombay of which each formed a part. That decisions of the predecessor Court or the parent Court in any such situation should be accepted with all the respect due to them is not in doubt or dispute. The question is whether the decisions of that Court are binding but since we have already reached our conclusion on a reading of the Sections of the Reorganization Act and particularly that of S. 87, we need not burden this judgment with any further discussion of the same.
(12) For reasons already given it is the opinion of this Court that decisions of the High Court of Bombay given prior to the appointed day are binding on this High Court.
(13) Answered accordingly. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
