Views In Lead Judgment Are Binding Precedents If Concurring Judgments Did Not Express Any Contrary Opinion On It: SC [Read Judgment]

Is a view on a legal issue expressed in a lead judgment delivered by one of the judges of a Supreme Court bench is a binding precedent if the other judges of the bench in their concurring opinions did not express any opinion on itt? One of the contentions of the appellant in Kaikhosrou Kavasji Framji vs. Union of India, was that the provisions of the Public Premises Act, 1971 Act are made applicable only to those properties which are admittedly belonging to the Central Government or the State Government as the case may be and therefore proceedings under the PP Act can be initiated against a person only when he is found to be in its unauthorized occupation without any lawful authority from its real owner i.e. The court further observed: "We are of the considered view that law laid down in the lead judgment in Express Newspaper is the law by three Hon'ble Judges who constituted the Bench and thus binds all the Courts in the country under Article 141 of the Constitution. The bench further noted that in State of Rajasthan vs. Padavati Devi also, the Supreme court has followed this judgment to hold that the State Government cannot take recourse to a summary remedy of eviction of a person under the State Revenue Laws from the land when such person raises a bona fide dispute about his right to remain in occupation over such land.