https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=186407 A prior Full Bench ruling cannot be treated as per incuriam merely because a later Bench thinks one aspect was omitted or the decision may be wrong. Per incuriam applies only where a binding precedent or a statutory provision with force of law was ignored. A coordinate Bench remains bound by the earlier decision and, if it disagrees, must follow it or refer the matter to a larger Bench. The High Court misapplied this doctrine in disregarding the earlier Full Bench ruling on the validity of Section 15 and the jurisdictional bars under Sections 4(b), 4(c) and 37 of the Bihar Consolidation of Holdings and Prevention of Fragmentation Act, 1956, so its judgment was set aside and the matter remitted. en-us Fri, 25 Apr 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 16 Sep 2016 16:41:55 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=186407 A prior Full Bench ruling cannot be treated as per incuriam merely because a later Bench thinks one aspect was omitted or the decision may be wrong. Per incuriam applies only where a binding precedent or a statutory provision with force of law was ignored. A coordinate Bench remains bound by the earlier decision and, if it disagrees, must follow it or refer the matter to a larger Bench. The High Court misapplied this doctrine in disregarding the earlier Full Bench ruling on the validity of Section 15 and the jurisdictional bars under Sections 4(b), 4(c) and 37 of the Bihar Consolidation of Holdings and Prevention of Fragmentation Act, 1956, so its judgment was set aside and the matter remitted. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 25 Apr 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=186407