“When a Court ignores the binding precedent of a Larger Bench, the Judgment so delivered is held to be per incuriam and has no precedential value.
The principle of per incuriam has been developed by the English Courts in relaxation of the rule of stare decisis. In practice per incuriam is per ignoratium. See, Paragraph 40, Punjab Land Development and Reclamation Corporation Ltd., Chandigarh, (1990) 3 SCC 682; Paragraph 54, V. Kishan Rao, (2010) 5 SCC 513.
We fail to see that how can Satyawati Sharma, (2008) 5 SCC 287 be said as per incuriam. The ratio of Gian Devi Anand, (1985) 2 SCC 683 has neither been ignored nor any contrary view has been taken by Satyawati Sharma. Gauri Shanker, (1994) 6 SCC 349 cannot be said to be binding precedent in reference to what has been dealt in Satyawati Sharma.”
– Hon’ble Justice Ashok Bhushan, Vinod Kumar v. Ashok Kumar Gandhi, [Civil Appeal No. 3793 of 2016].