Obiter Observations of Chandrachud J

Posted on by Rudrajyoti Nath Ray

My Lord, State of Madras v. Gannon Dunkerley, [1959] 1 SCR 379 – Good Law?

“It is interesting to note, a 7 Judge Bench in M/s. Vishnu Agencies (Pvt.) Ltd. v. Commercial Tax Officer, (1978) 1 SCC 520, doubted Gannon Dunkerley’s case by stating, its correctness would have to await a more suitable occasion in that the entry, namely, 48 of List II of the 7th Schedule to The Government of India Act had been narrowly construed. It may be pointed out, H.M. Seervai’s Constitutional Law of India, Vol. III, Page 2326 had this to say: “This decision was rendered in 1959 and was repeatedly followed, till a doubt was cast on its correctness in Vishnu Agencies by the obiter observations of Chandrachud J”.”

– Hon’ble Justice R.F. Nariman, Commissioner, Central Excise & Customs, Kerala v. M/s Larsen & Toubro Ltd., [Civil Appeal 6770 of 2004].

'The Last Word' seeks to include not only wise and witty sayings but also curiosities. These words are not of obligation but of delight. I am not alone in my refusal to believe, law is tedious. For all who escaped these percipient eyes, mea culpa maxima. History, after all, has many cunning passages, contrived corridors and issues.