I may add that Mr. Chhatrapati had vehemently contended that the judgment of the Supreme Court in Subhadra's case, is a judgment by four Judges' Bench and the subsequent judgment in Vasudev's case, is by three Judges' Bench and as such the decision of the Subhadra's case should be preferred as the same has been rendered by a larger Bench. In support of his contention, Mr. Chhatrapati placed reliance upon the decisions of the Supreme Court in Mattulal v. Radhe Lal, MANU/SC/0010/1974 : 1SCR127 and Union of India and another v. Raghubir Singh (dead) by Lrs. etc., MANU/SC/0619/1989 : 178ITR548(SC) . It is not possible to accede to the contentions of Mr. Chhatrapati. When the earlier judgment of the Supreme Court has been considered by a later decision of the same Court in Vasudev's case, this Court will be bound by the said decision in Vasudev's case. As pointed out by the Full Bench of Karnataka High Court, if the Supreme Court itself in a later decision adverts to its earlier decision and lays down the import of the former on any aspect, such later decision is conclusive so far as the High Court is concerned.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Civil Revision Application No. 864 of 1990
Decided On: 08.07.1994
Govindram Bros. Pvt. Ltd. and Ors. Vs. Alexander Benedict Joseph Pereira
A.P. Shah, J.
Citation: 1995(1) MHLJ115,1995(2) Bom CR 531