Tejas Shah CA Finalist, India ) (

Language and it¶s limitation.  What is Statute ? It¶s Origin, Nature & Scope.  Basic approach (a) Read Statute as a whole and (b) If Language is plain, do not stretch / contract it.  Difficulty arises when language is not clear. Therefore comes the role of interpretation / construction and their distinction.  Broadly two interpretation aids are available:(1) Internal aids - which are existing in the Statutes itself (2) External aids - which are found outside the Statutes.

 Preamble in Constitution of India. . if language of the enactment is clear.(1) PREAMBLE Dictionary meaning : Introduction or Preliminary Statement  Preamble contains main object of the Act  Preamble cannot be referred.  Preamble is a key to open the mind of the makers of the act and the mischief which they intended to remove.

(3) Kedar Nath v/s State of West Bengal ( 1953 .) Rulings:(1) Kesavanand Bharati v/s State of Kerala ( 1973 . 1950 ³ referred to end the dispute. 1949 ³ (4) Rastriya Mill Mazdoor Sangh v/s N.PREAMBLE (Cont. ³Textile Undertaking (Takeover of Management) Act.´ .SC ) Preamble to ³ West Bengal Special Courts Act.SC ) Declared by majority that preamble is part of the constitution (2) State of West Bengal v/s Anwar Ali ( 1952 . (2) ±´ West Bengal Criminal Law Amendment Act. 1983.SC ) Held. Preamble cannot be invoked when language is clear.C ( 1996 .T.SC ) Identical approach as above in No.

 Title is not considered if language is clear. Rulings:(1) Ashwini Kumar v/s Arbinda Bose ( 1952 . 1940 ³ . Act etc.SC ) ³Punjab Trade Employees Act. CPC. Reference to IPC. .Purpose of title is to give a general description about the object of the act.´ It¶s Long title ³ An Act to authorize advocates of Supreme Court to Practice as of right in any High Court ³ was referred to end the controversy. 1951. PC.Title referred to settle the dispute. (2) Manoharlal v/s State of Punjab (1961 .SC ) ³Supreme Court Advocates (Practice in High Courts) Act. Cr. I.D.(2) TITLE  Short / Long Title .

(3) HEADING  Heading are of two kinds (1) Heading prefixed to a section (2) Heading prefixed to a group or set of sections. Various heading for group of offences in various section.SC ) ³U. Tenancy Act.180 Heading of section ³ Ejectment of Person occupying land without title ³ was referred by court for resolving the dispute.  Heading is treated as preamble to above.P. Rulings:Bhinka v/s Charan Sing (1959 . 299 to 348. 1939´ S. .  Heading is not useful if language is clear.  Reference to IPC S.

Courts do not depend upon them now. 1951´ S. hence they are referred in interpretation.SC ) ³Payment of Bonus Act.  But in the case of our Constitution of India. They are hence not part of the Statutes.SC ) ³Representation of People¶s Act. 117 and S. Unlike in our Constitution of India.SC ) . Occasionally they are inaccurate. unlike in past. Rulings:(1) Charanlal Shah v/s NandKishor Bhatt ( 1973 . 31-A (3) S. marginal notes are added by the constituent assembly. marginal notes in other enactments are added by drafters.(4) MARGINAL NOTES  Inserted at the side of sections and express the effect of sections.P. 86 (2) Madura Coats v/s It¶s Workmen ( 1977 . Gupta v/s President of India. ( 1982 . 1965´ S.

(5) CONTEXT  Study of surrounding provisions provide answers to an ambiguous or equivocal or intricate word. 302 Punishment for Murder. Culpable Homicide u/s 6(46) . Words like Murder. Read entire Statute. Study the Context. Death. . 497 IPC on Adultery. 300 IPC provide answer to questions arising in the study of S. 299. Examples:. 302.(1) S. (2) S. Study the context in which word is used.

.  In India. Semi-colon. oblique. comma. Punctuation played no role in interpretation. bracket etc. colon.(6) PUNCTUATION AND BRACKETS  Full-stop. hyphen. Courts usually give importance to them but if thereby the meaning obtained is doubtful then the courts interpret the provisions as if no punctuation marks exist and arrive at the meaning.  Before 1850 in England.

K.SC ) (3) Ashwini Kumar v/s Arbinda Bose ( 1952 .PUNCTUATION AND BRACKETS (Cont. Shabir v/s State of Maharashtra ( 1979 . Gopalan v/s State of Madras ( 1950 . (4) Moh.SC ) Punctuation not followed by court. 27 ³Drugs and Cosmetics Act.´ (5) Strange Case of Sir Roger Casements (accused literally hanged by a comma) . ) Rulings:(1) A.SC ) S.SC ) Article 22(7) of Constitution having commas interpreted. 1940. (2) Judgment in above case overruled in Shambhunath Sarkar v/s State of West Bengal ( 1973 .

299.  References to S. they are not treated as complete. of IPC.(7) ILLUSTRATIONS  Provisions are made practical through Illustrations.  They cannot control plain meaning. 300.  However.  Interpretation cannot be made contrary to Illustrations.  No extended or restricted meaning can be given to provisions on the basis of illustrations.  IPC is full of illustrations. 88 etc. .

32(5) . Gark ( 1916 .Illustration ( L ) referred. Syedol Ariffin v/s Y.ILLUSTRATIONS (cont. (2) Moh.PC ) Evidence Act S. 101 and 106 of ³ Indian Evidence Act.) Rulings:(1) Shambhunath v/s State of Ajmer ( 1965 . .O. 1872 ´ referred Principle evolved on interpreting illustrations.SC ) Illustrations in S.

...3(17) µ Ind.D Act s..3(19) µ industry µ I. creates a fiction (6) µthat is to say¶ .. It cannot be used to explain same word in other enactment unless such enactments are Pari Materia.. (5) µdeemed to be¶ .D Act s...... 2(j) µ Industry ¶ / BIR Act s. Illustrative of meaning .. 2(g) µ Employer ¶ / BIR Act s..(8) DEFINITION AND INTERPRETATION CLAUSE  Natural meaning of some words are extended or restricted through definition / interpretation clause in the enactment.... Sometimes particular meaning is provided. enlarges ordinary meaning (4) µdenotes¶ .3(14) µ employer µ I..... exhaustive meaning constructed (2) µMeans and includes¶ ««´ exhaustive meaning constructed ³ (3) µIncludes¶ . disputeµ Above words carry different meaning in each act. confined to the ambit of the word. dispute ¶ / BIR Act s....  Following words indicate definition (1) µMeans¶ . 2(k) µ Ind. Exceptions are : I..D Act s....

Act S. 16(1) (2) State of Bombay v/s Hospital Mazdoor Sabha ( 1960 . 229(1).6 referred. referred. 1872 S. 2 For Interpretation Clauses (2) IPC S. . Calcutta (1956 .DEFINITION AND INTERPRETATION CLAUSE Examples:(1) The Indian Contract Act. 367(1) & General Clauses Act. 2(m) & S. Rulings: (1) Pradyat Kumar v/s Chief Justice. Tis Hazari Court v/s State of Gujarat ( 1991 ± SC ) Art. 129 of Constitution of India.D. 6 to 51 Most of which are definition clauses. 2(j) µ Industry¶. (4) Delhi Judicial Service Association. 1897 S.SC ) Constitution Art. (3) Ardeshir v/s Bombay State ( 1962 ± SC ) Factory Act S.SC ) I.

300 Exception .SC ) Bombay Tenancy & Agricultural Land Act. Limits the ambit of the section.1948 S. However attempt to reconcile both should be made first. Devdasan v/s Union of India (1964-SC ) Constitution of India Art 16(1) and 16(4) (2) Ishwarbhai v/s Motibhai ( 1966 .Proviso Example of Proviso :. which it qualifies.  If proviso contradicts main enactment.  General rule on Proviso is .1 & Proviso 1 to 3.(1) T.IPC S. then proviso prevails as it speaks the last intention of the legislature. Proviso is added in the section. .(9) PROVISO  Ordinarily for exception to main section or exemption from it. 43(c) .

(10) EXCEPTION AND SAVING CLAUSES  Exception is added to an enactment for exempting something which would otherwise fall in the ambit of main provision. 76 to 105 (2) IPC S. 29 (2) Hindu Marriage Act. in conflict with operative part. 30. .  Difference between Proviso and Exception : Section is followed by proviso and proviso applies in certain circumstances whereas exceptions apply in all circumstances. 300 Exception 1 to 5  Saving clauses are appended in cases of repeal and reenactment of a Statute to ensure the continuation of past rights. 1955 S. 29 (1 to 4) (3) Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act. 1956 S. Example of Exceptions :. Example:.(1) IPC S. 1897 S.  Ordinarily.(1) General Clauses Act. operative part prevails over exception and only in rare cases exception prevails over operative part.

D.(1) I. Rules are considered as part of Statutes. 1933. Sometimes rules provide clarification for ambiguous provision of the Act.(1) TELCO v/s Gram Panchayat (1976 ± SC ) Bombay Village Panchayat Act. 1908 S. 107 .(11) RULES Rules are understood as showing procedure necessary for administration and execution of main Act.89 and Rule 108. S . Act ± 90 Rules (2) BIR Act ± 76 Rules Rulings:. Meaning of µHouse¶ (2) 1913 ± Calcutta Case CPC. Examples:.

1948 & Bombay Buildings ( Control and Eviction ) Ordinance. 5(2)(d) and S.16(1) Bombay Buildings ( Control and Eviction ) Act.(12) FICTIONS Fiction is a legal assumption which . 6 of Prevention of Corruption Act. does not exist.S Dharmanandan v/s Central Government & Others (1979 ± SC ) S. (2) K. Examples:. In Fact.(1) Hindu Marriage Act. 1948.(1) State of Bombay v/s Pandurang ( 1981-BH ) S. 29 (1)(2)(3) Rulings:. 1947 . 1955 S.

(13) EXPLANATION  Explains meaning of a particular provision  Doubt. P. vagueness etc removed  Offers additional support to the object of the provision  It cannot take away statutory right which is awarded  Court¶s duty to harmonize in case of conflict between main provision and the explanation. Ambiguity.125(1) & (3) Explanation on µwife¶ (2) IPC S. 299 Explanation 1 to 3 . Examples:.(1) Cr. Confusion.C S.

Schedule 1 to 12.Schedule 1 to 5. Rulings:Alphalia Pharmaceuticals Ltd. Act prevails. (2) I. Examples:.  It is part of the act.  It comes at the end of the act.Schedule 1 to 3. (3) BIR Act .D. Act . v/s State of Maharashtra ( 1989 ± SC ) .(1) Constitution of India.(14) SCHEDULE  Schedule indicates how claims or rights under the act are asserted or powers exercised.  In conflicts between Schedule and the Act.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful