AIR 2004 SUPREME COURT 4778 ::2004 AIR SCW 5457 ::2004 (7) Supreme 126 ::2004 SCFBRC 454 ::(2004) 24 IndLD 287 ::(2004) 2 WLC(SC)CVL 794 ::2004 (8) SCC 579 ::(2004) 8 Scale 376 ::(2005) 58 All LR 139 ::2004 (4) ICC 783 ::(2005) 2 CTC 413 (MAD) ::(2004) 5 CTC 74 (SC) ::(2005) 3 Mad LW 59 ::2005 (1) MadLW 209 ::(2005) 2 Mad LJ 378 ::2004 (4) MadLJ147 ::(2005) 2 RenCR 7 ::2004 (2) RenCR 486 ::(2005) 2 RentLR 266 ::2004 (2) RentLR 641 ::2005 (2) RenCJ 170 ::2004 (6) SLT 586 ::(2004) 7 Supreme 126 ::(2004) 24 AllIndCas 671 (SC) ::(2004) 8 JT 171 (SC) ::2004 (8) JT 171 ::2004 (10) SRJ 136

Supreme Court Of India

(From : Madras)*

Hon'ble Judge(s): Arijit Pasayat, C. K. Thakker , JJ

(A) Constitution of India , Art.141— Precedents - Reliance on earlier decision - Should be placed after discussing how factual position in that case fits with fact situation of case in hand - Judgment of Court not to be interpreted as words of statute. Courts should not place reliance on decisions without discussing as to how the factual situation fits in with the fact situation of the decision on which reliance is placed. Observations of Courts are neither to be read as Euclid's theorems nor as provisions of the statute and that too taken out of their context. These observations must be read in the context in which they appear to have been stated. Judgments of Courts are not to be construed as statutes. To interpret @page-SC4779 words, phrases and provisions of a statute, it may become necessary for Judges to embark into lengthy discussions but the discussion is meant to explain and not to define. Judges interpret statutes, they do not interpret judgments. They interpret words of statutes; their words are not to be interpreted as statutes. Circumstantial flexibility, one additional or different facts may make a world of difference between conclusions in two cases. Disposal of cases by blindly placing reliance on a decision is not proper.(Para 9) (B) Ta....