Triple

Given a phrase, classify it is english named entity (e.g., persons, organizations, works of art) in Latin script, or not (e.g., literals, dates, URLs, verbose phrases). For disambiguation, the statement where the phrase occurs as object is also given. Please return a JSON object with `phrase` (string, the phrase being analyzed) and `is_ne` (boolean, indicating whether the phrase is a Named Entity).

Phrase: I.C. Golaknath v. State of Punjab | Statement: [Article 368, subjectOf, I.C. Golaknath v. State of Punjab]

Target entity: I.C. Golaknath v. State of Punjab
Context triple: [Article 368, subjectOf, I.C. Golaknath v. State of Punjab]

• A. Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala
  Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala is a landmark 1973 Supreme Court of India judgment that established the basic structure doctrine, limiting Parliament’s power to amend the Constitution.
• B. S. R. Bommai v. Union of India
  S. R. Bommai v. Union of India is a landmark 1994 Supreme Court of India judgment that curtailed the arbitrary use of President’s Rule and strengthened federalism by applying the basic structure doctrine to center-state relations.
• C. Waman Rao v. Union of India
  Waman Rao v. Union of India is a landmark 1981 Supreme Court of India judgment that reaffirmed and clarified the basic structure doctrine by upholding its applicability to constitutional amendments made after the Kesavananda Bharati decision.
• D. Indira Nehru Gandhi v. Raj Narain
  Indira Nehru Gandhi v. Raj Narain is a landmark 1975 Indian Supreme Court case that scrutinized the validity of Prime Minister Indira Gandhi’s election and significantly shaped constitutional limits on parliamentary power.
• E. A. C. Jose v. Sivan Pillai
  A. C. Jose v. Sivan Pillai is a landmark Supreme Court of India judgment that clarified the scope of the Election Commission’s powers in conducting elections under the Indian Constitution.
• F. None of above. chosen
• G. Unsure - the case is ambiguous/there is not enough information to decide.

Generate a one-sentence description of the target entity. 
You are given a context triple in the form (subject, predicate, object), where the object is the target entity. 
# Instructions
Use the triple to infer relevant information about the entity. Describe the entity based on what is most defining, well-known. 
Avoid repeating the information from the triple, unless really essential.
# Response Format
Return only the sentence: "Description: [one-sentence description of the target entity]"

Entity: I.C. Golaknath v. State of Punjab
Triple: [Article 368, subjectOf, I.C. Golaknath v. State of Punjab]

I.C. Golaknath v. State of Punjab is a landmark 1967 Indian Supreme Court case that held Parliament could not amend fundamental rights under the Constitution, sharply limiting its amending power until this view was later modified.

Target entity: I.C. Golaknath v. State of Punjab
Target entity description: I.C. Golaknath v. State of Punjab is a landmark 1967 Indian Supreme Court case that held Parliament could not amend fundamental rights under the Constitution, sharply limiting its amending power until this view was later modified.

• A. Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala
  Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala is a landmark 1973 Supreme Court of India judgment that established the basic structure doctrine, limiting Parliament’s power to amend the Constitution.
• B. S. R. Bommai v. Union of India
  S. R. Bommai v. Union of India is a landmark 1994 Supreme Court of India judgment that curtailed the arbitrary use of President’s Rule and strengthened federalism by applying the basic structure doctrine to center-state relations.
• C. Waman Rao v. Union of India
  Waman Rao v. Union of India is a landmark 1981 Supreme Court of India judgment that reaffirmed and clarified the basic structure doctrine by upholding its applicability to constitutional amendments made after the Kesavananda Bharati decision.
• D. Indira Nehru Gandhi v. Raj Narain
  Indira Nehru Gandhi v. Raj Narain is a landmark 1975 Indian Supreme Court case that scrutinized the validity of Prime Minister Indira Gandhi’s election and significantly shaped constitutional limits on parliamentary power.
• E. A. C. Jose v. Sivan Pillai
  A. C. Jose v. Sivan Pillai is a landmark Supreme Court of India judgment that clarified the scope of the Election Commission’s powers in conducting elections under the Indian Constitution.
• F. None of above. chosen