1. I dont think you understand how law is practiced in courts. Judges dont know the whole law, nobody does. There's no electronic precedent meter. I remember a HC judge not knowing the Supreme Court judgement in Independent thought raising the 375 IPC age to 18 years, and passing order against the px. There are numerous such things. Judges have to be shown the law by lawyers, warna they are as clueless as any govt employee.

2. Most precedents apply to a specific fact situation. Whether it applies to a similar/ opposite fact situation is an inferential based approach, and that discretion is with the courts. So yea a tax law matter where the ratio also provides some share transfer valuation etc may not apply to a normal CCPS issue.

3. Many precedents are conflicted by other decisions by other benches, sometimes lower in hierarchy (death penalty, adoption, divorce etc.). So yea, the truth is judges dont follow the precedent many times, cuz there aint no-one to stop them doing that, so it has to be brought to their notice continually.

Hope this helps.

Please do a preliminary research yourself to comprehend the scope of it before assuming that we are didn't look for it extensively.

If something is not there, it's not there. Dont always assume "there must be something on it".

Sometimes i think law is subjected to serendipity of luck. You can find a case within 10 mins someday and the someday you might not be able to find it even after spending 10 hours