Prof Dippak/IDT Basics of Law/Rules of Interpretation

RULES OF INTERPRETATION

 Rule of LITERAL INTERPRETATION [Golden Rule of Interpretation]

Meaning  This is the primary rule of interpretation.
 It states that words used in a statute must be given their ordinary, normal and
grammatical meaning. Their ordinary meaning neither be enlarged nor restricted.

 PURPOSIVE INTERPRETATION
Meaning  It says that ordinarily the Court must find out the intention of the legislature from the
words used in a statute by giving them their natural meaning (literal meaning) but if
this leads to absurdity, inconvenience, injustice or evasion, then Court must
modify the meaning to such an extent as would prevent such a consequence.
[Word of Caution: It is for judge to say whether literal interpretation is leading to absurd
results or not.]

Example i) Excise: Sec 2(d) [Definition of Excisable Goods]

 MISCHIEF RULE [HEYDON’s RULE]

Meaning  For the sure and true interpretation of all statute, four things are to be discerned and
considered:
(a) What was the common law before the meaning of the Act;
(b) What was the mischief and defect for which the common law did not provide;
(c) What remedy the Parliament intended to resolve; and
(d) The judges shall take such an interpretation as shall suppress the mischief and
advance the remedy.
Example i) Misc Following was a provision in Street Offence Act, 1959
“Prostitutes shall be liable to prosecution if found guilty of attracting the
attention of passers-by in street”.
A prostitute was attracting attention of passers-by from balconies/windows. It was
held that “considering what is mischief aimed at by this Act. Everybody knows that this
was an act intended to clean up the streets, to enable people to walk along the streets
without being molested or solicited by common prostitutes. Viewed in that way, the
precise place from which a prostitute addressed her solicitation to somebody walking
in the street became irrelevant.

 Rule of HARMONIOUS INTERPRETATION

Meaning  This rule needs to be referred to when two provisions in a statute are contradictory to
each other.
 As per this rule, while interpretating such contrary provisions, it is the duty of
courts to avoid a head-on-clash between two sections of the Act and to construe the
provisions which appear to be in conflict with each other in manner as to harmonise
them.
 The provisions of one section of a statute cannot be used to defeat the other
provisions unless the court, in spite of its efforts, finds it impossible to effect
reconciliation between them.
Example ii) Excise: Sec 4-A [Explanation 2(b) vs Sec 4-A(4)]
Prof Dippak/IDT Basics of Law/Rules of Interpretation

SOME OTHER MAXIMS [RULES]

 Rule of EJUSDEM GENERIS
Meaning  The rule of ejusdem generis is generally invoked (applied) where the scope and ambit
of the general words which follow certain specific words (which have some
common characteristic and constitute a genus) is required to be determined.
This rule applies when:
(a) The statute contains enumeration of specific words;
(b) The subjects of enumeration constitute a class or category;
(c) That class or category is not exhausted by enumeration;
(d) The general terms / words follow that enumeration; and
(e) There is no indication of different legislative intent.

 By the application of this rule the scope and ambit of the general words which
follow certain specific words constituting a genus (class) is restricted to things
ejusdem generis (matching to/similar with) with those preceding them, unless the
context otherwise requires.
Example i) Misc: Where a wife asked husband for money for purchase of “bread, butter, fruits,
vegetables and other things”, then the expression “other things” cannot be
interpretated to include “diamond jewellery”. Its interpretation has to be restricted to
cover only eatables.

 Rule of NOSCITUR A SOCIIS

Meaning  It says that the meaning of a word is to be judged by the company it keeps. The
meaning of the doubtful words may be ascertained by reference to the meaning of
words associated with it.
Example i) Misc: In one case, Schedule to UP Sales Tax Act provides for concessional rate of
sales tax in case of
“Old, discarded, unserviceable or obsolete machinery”
The expression “old” was interpretated to refer to old machinery which had been non-
functional or non-usable (by applying rule of Noscitur a sociis).

ii) The entry “Paints, colours, lacquers, varnishes, POLISHES …..” will not cover
“Shoe Polish” within its ambit (by applying rule of Noscitur a sociis)
Prof Dippak/IDT Basics of Law/ Interpretation of Definitions

INTERPRETATION OF “WORDS/EXPRESSIONS”
Used in a Statute but not defined therein
1) Definitions in [A] Definition given in General Clauses Act, 1897
other Act  The purpose of General Clauses Act is to place in one single statute different
provisions as regards interpretation of words (and legal principles) which would
otherwise have to be specified separately in many different Acts. Whatever the
General Clauses Act says, whether as regards the meaning of words or as regards
legal principles, has to be read into every statute (unless a particular statute makes
any contrary specific provision)

E.g.,: Following definitions given in General Clauses Act shall be applicable to every
act:
a) „He‟ includes „She‟.
b) „Government‟ shall include both „CG‟ and „SG‟.
c) „Imprisonment” shall mean simple as well as rigorous imprisonment.

[B] Definition given in other Acts (which are pari materia with the Statute under
consideration)
[Pari materia: Two statutes are said to be pari materia with each other, when they
deal with the same subject.
Statutes may be in pari materia in either of 2 sense:
i) Horizontal relationship with each other: Two acts, both of which are in force at
the material time, have a horizontal relationship with each other.
ii) Vertical relationship with each other: A statute which is not in force at the
material time (having been repealed) is said to have a vertical relationship with
a statute which is subsequently enacted on the same subject and which is in force
at the material time.

2) Common  When a word has not been defined in the Act and is a word of everyday use, it must be
Parlance interpretated in its popular sense meaning “that sense which people conservant with
the subject-matter with which the statute is dealing would attribute to it”.

E.g.,: a) The word “vegetable” cannot be taken to cover up “sugarcane” as in its popular
sense sugarcane is not understood as „vegetable‟ though in its botanical sense
sugarcane is a vegetable.

3) Judicial  Where the meaning of a particular word/expression has been earlier considered and
Precedents decided by Court, then that meaning shall continue to prevail unless a specific meaning
has subsequently been assigned to it in the statute.
Prof Dippak/IDT Basics of Law/ Interpretation of Definitions

INTERPRETATION OF DEFINITIONS

1) Exhaustive  This definition begins with the word “MEANS”

Definition  Generally, when the definition of a word begins with “means” it is indicative of
[Restrictive the fact that the meaning of the word has been restricted, that is to say, it would
definition] not mean anything else but what has been indicated /stated.
 When a statute says that a word shall mean certain things, it is a hard and fast
definition, and no other meaning can be assigned to the expression that what is
stated. [CO-OPERATIVE BANK EMPLOYEES UNION – 2007-SC.]

2) Inclusive  This definition begins with the word “INCLUDES”

Definition
[Expansive  Generally, when the definition of a word begins with “includes” it is indicative of
definition] the fact that the meaning of the word has been expanded, that is to say, it would
cover up not only such things as they signify according to their natural normal
meaning, but also those things which the definition declares that it shall
include.

 When the word “includes” is used in the definition, the legislature does not
intend to restrict the definition the definition: it makes the definition
enumerative but not exhaustive. That is to say, the term defined will retain its
ordinary meaning but its scope would be extended to bring within it matters,
which in its ordinary meaning MAY or MAY NOT comprise. [CO-
OPERATIVE BANK EMPLOYEES UNION – 2007-SC.]

[Tutorial Note: Legislatures resort to inclusive definitions for 2 purposes:

a) Generally, it is used to enlarge the meaning of the word so as to take in
the ordinary/popular sense of the word and also the sense which the
statute wishes to attribute to it (expansion role) – e.g., ‘He’ includes
‘She’.;
b) Sometimes, it is also used to include meanings about which there might
be some disputes (clarificatory role– e.g., ‘Veg item’ includes ‘egg’).

3) Exhaustive and  This definition uses both words – “MEANS” and “INCLUDES”
Inclusive
Definition  If the expression used is
“X means Y and includes Z”
Then the legal consequence is as follows:
(a) By virtue of ‘means’ part of the definition the specified objects are covered
by the definition;
(b) By virtue of the ‘includes’ part, the objects specified, as included in the
definition, stand covered by the definition.
(c) Nothing else is covered by such a definition.
Prof Dippak/IDT Basics of Law/ Legal Terminology and Presumptions

LEGAL WORDS
Provided that  A proviso is meant to be an exception to something within the main enactment (or to
(Proviso) qualify something enacted therein) which but for the proviso would be within the
purview of the main enactment. In other words, a proviso is added to a principal
clause primarily with the objective of taking out of the scope of that principal
clause what is included in it and what the legislature desires should be excluded.
 When one finds a proviso to a section, the natural presumption is that, but for the
proviso, the enacting part (main part) of the section would have included the subject-
matter of the proviso.
 A proviso must be interpretated with reference to the preceding parts of the provision
to which it is appended.
 Ordinarily, a proviso is not interpretated as stating a general rule.
Notwithstanding  The clause “notwithstanding anything” is referred as “non-obstante clause”.
anything  A clause beginning with “notwithstanding anything contained in (the section)/ (the
Act)/(any other law)” is appended to a section in the beginning with a view to give
that section, in case of conflict, an overriding effect over the provision of the
Section/Act/Any other law mentioned in the non-obstante clause. It is equivalent of
saying that in spite of provisions of any other Sec/Act/Other Law mentioned in
the non-obstante clause, the enactment following it will have its full operation.
Subject to  It is reverse of the phrase “notwithstanding anything”.
 The expression “subject to” conveys the idea of a provision yielding place to
another provision to which it is made subject to. Thus, where enactment A is made
subject to B, the effect is that enactment B overrides enactment A.

Such as  The words “such as” indicate that what are mentioned thereafter are only illustrative
and not exhaustive. (i.e., other things can also be covered)
Namely  The word “namely” indicates that what are mentioned thereafter is exhaustive and not
illustrative. (i.e., other things cannot be covered)
And  As per rules of grammer, “and” is conjunctive. In other words, it has generally a
commulative sense. Thus, “A and B” means both and A and B must exist.
However, “and” may be interpretated as “or”, if the context so requires
particularly if the ordinarily rule mentioned above would lead to absurdity.
E.g.,: Excise:  Definition of “Excisable goods” [First AND Second Sch to CETA].
Or  As per rules of grammer, “and” is disjunctive. In other words, it has generally an
alternate sense. Thus, “A or B” means it is enough it either of them exists.
However, “or” may be interpretated as “and”, if the context so requires
particularly if the ordinarily rule mentioned above would lead to absurdity.
Other
1. Presumptions:
A fact assumed to be true under the law is called a presumption. In other words, a presumption,
in law, is a supposition held as good/real before it is shown/certainly known to be so.
Presumptions are generally of following 2 types:
i) Rebuttable Presumption: The presumption which once made is allowed to be contradicted by
a party leading evidence to the contrary.
e.g, 1) Man is assumed to be innocent unless contrary is proved.
2) A person who has possession of the goods is presumed to be owner.
3) Where a person has disappeared and has not been heard of 7 Years, the person is presumed to be
dead after expiry of 7 years.
ii) Conclusive Presumption: The presumption which once made is not allowed to be
contradicted by a party.
2. Some presumptions relating to Interpretation of Any Statute
1) Presumption against Retrospective Effect: Every provision is presumed to be
prospective unless it is expressly made to have retrospective effect.


2) Benefit to Assessee: If a provision of a taxing statute can be reasonably interpretated
into two ways, then that interpretation which is favourable to the assessee has to be
accepted.
E.g.,
i) Excise: Normal Transaction Value (NTV) [Rule 2 of CEVR, 2000]