PAPER SET :- ____1____

Shri Vile Parle Kelavani Mandal’s

PRAVIN GANDHI COLLEGE OF LAW

[Affiliated to University of Mumbai]

FIFTH YEAR LL.B./B.L.S. ONLINE EXAMINATION – DECEMBER, 2021

[Subject: Interpretation of Statutes] [Semester – IX]

[Date of Examination: 03/12/2021] [Time : 1 Hour] [Marks : 30]

[Seat No. 818]

NB: 1. Please check whether you have got the right question paper.
2. All questions are compulsory.

1. Define “Immovable Property” as laid down in the General Clauses Act.

Ans 1. Ans: Immovable Property is defined in Section 3(26) of the General Clauses Act. It
defines it as: Section 3(26) “Immovable property", shall include land, benefits to arise out
of land and things attached to the earth, or permanently fastened to anything attached to
the earth.
Definitions or Interpretation Clauses
The legislature has the power to define words even artificially. Statutes often define
certain words and expressions which are used elsewhere in the body of the statute. When
words are defined, the definitions may be restrictive of the ordinary meaning of such
words or they may be extensive.
Following are some of the types of words used while defining:
(a) "means" or "shall mean-where the definition mentions that a word 'means' or 'shall
mean' such and such, the definition is restrictive and exhaustive. For instance, the
definition of 'moveable property under the General Clauses Act,1897 reads "moveable
property' shall mean a property of every description, except immovable property.
(b) "include"- where the definition mentions that a word "includes" or "shall include" such
and such, the definition is extensive. For instance, the definition of "immovable property"
under the General Clauses Act, 1897 reads "immoveable property" shall include land,
benefits to arise out of land, and things attached to the earth, or permanently fastened to
anything attached to the earth.
2. Write note on Doctrine of Prospective Overruling.
Ans 2. The Doctrine of Prospective Overruling dictates that a decision made in a particular
case would have operation only in the future and will not carry any retrospective effect on
any past decisions. Going by the literal meaning of this terminology, “prospective” is
understood as something which only has a future operation and the term “overrule”
connotes setting aside a precedent or a decision. It has been often tagged as a deviation
from the Blackstonian view of Law, which postulates that a judge should follow the
Doctrine of Stare Decisis in courts and that the power of a judge is restricted to declaration
of law and not making the law. This view undeniably confirms the retrospective norm of a
precedent. The primary intention of courts in applying this Doctrine has been attaining
justice as the principle of retrospective operation robbed an individual of fair trial and
conclusion. The Doctrine prescribes the parameters within which a judicial decision is
bound to operate. In simpler words, it provides that transactions made before a judicial
pronouncement will not be termed invalidated following the change of law.
The Doctrine marked its application in Indian jurisprudence for the first time in the case
of I.C. Golak Nath v. State of Punjab in 1967. J. Subba Rao advocated the application of
this Doctrine and insisted that judicial restraints are called for, given the effect of the
withdrawal of these amendments on the social and economic affairs of our country. He
discarded the objections made to this Doctrine by referring to the elastic and wide terms
used in the Indian Constitution enabling the Court to meet the ends of justice.
Kesvananda Bharti vs. State of Kerala overruled the Golaknath judgement but the
Doctrine, as laid down in the impugned judgement remained intact and found its
application in many other Supreme Court cases in both constitutional and non-
constitutional contexts

3. What do you understand by ‘Repeal’ of a statute?

Ans 3. In common law for the act which is expired or repealed it is presumed that the act
never existed unless a contrary intention appeared . All the matters which are already
decided under the repeal act were closed if during the pendency of a case a statute is
expired or repealed all the transaction the repeal statues were closed even though the
transaction the repeals that you had begun when it was in force. No proceedings under
repealed statute can be commenced or continue after the repeal. Repeal of law takes effect
from the date of repeal and their field Lord means in operation for the period before its
repeat
 In case of repeal of statute delegated or subordinated legislation also ceases to have any
force once the main actors repealed . But if the delegated legislations clearly preserved
then the repealed act will play a vital role in its interpretation.

Effects of Repeal
When a temporary statute is expired all notification, orders, rules made under the
temporary statutes also become inoperative. Any appointment made under the temporary
statutes become “functus ufflolo”
The authority performing any act under the temporary statue also becomes exhausted on
the expiry of the statute the person is released from detention on the expiry of the
temporary statute the sentence awarded and the penalties imposed by the court during the
lifetime of the temporary statutes cannot be cancelled on the expiry of the temporary
statute.

4. Explain how ‘Legislative Debates’ are important in the interpretation of Statutes?

Ans. 4.Any Act before it is passed, is thoroughly discussed on the floor of the Parliament
or the State legislature. Traditionally, the Courts used to consider the legislative debates of
a Statute to know its true context. But, in modern times, such debates are not admitted as
an aid to interpretation. Therefore legislative debates are inadmissible as aids to
interpretation. The reason behind is that, whatever was in the mind of the legislators has
already been expressed through words in the Statute. Therefore, Courts
should not be made to get influenced by the individual views of the legislators. The
debates in the Parliament on the Bill are not admissible for the construction of an Act,
which is finally enacted after the debates. The collective intention of the legislature as a
whole, is expressed in the Statute. The generality of the words used in the Statute should
not be cut down by any statement made by the individual about the object and intention of
the Act.
Case Laws:
1) A. K. Gopalan vs. State of MadrasIn this case, the Supreme Court rejected the speech
made in the course of Debate as an aid to interpretation. The Court observed that, such
speech made in the course of Debate on a Bill indicates the subjective intent of the
speaker. Such speech does not reflect the mental process lying behind the majority of the
voters that passed the Bill. It will not be reasonable to assume that the minds of all those
majority voters of the Statute were in accord with each other.
 2) Keshavananda Bharati vs. State ofKeralaIn this case, the Supreme Court held that, the
speeches made by the members of the legislature in
the course of debates relating to enactment of a Statute, cannot be used as an aid for
interpreting any of the provisions of the Statute.

In case off the interpretation of the Constitution of India, speeches in the Constituent
Assembly, can be pursued to find out the true intention of the framers of the Constitution.
This is limited only to theinterpretation of the Constitution and not to other Statutes.

Case Law
A.V.S. Narsimha Rao ws. State ofAndhraPradesh - In this case, while interpreting Article
16 (3), reference to the Constituent Assembly debates were made to support the
construction of Article 16 (3).

5. What is the meaning of ‘Retrospective operation of a statue’?

Ans 5. The retrospective operation of an enactment may mean one thing and its affecting the
rights of parties another. Normally, an enactment is prospective in nature. It does not affect that
which has gone, or completed and closed up already. Ordinarily, the presumption with respect to
an enactment is that, unless there is something in it to show that it means otherwise, it deals with
future contingencies, and does not annul or affect existing rights and liabilities or vested rights, or
obligations already acquired under some provisions of law although its effect is that it does not
affect an existing right as well. If an enactment expressly provides that it should be deemed to
have come into effect from a past date, it is retrospective in nature. It then operates to affect
existing rights and obligations, and is construed to take away, impair or curtail, a vested right
which had been acquired under some existing law. If an enactment is intended to be retrospective
in operation, and also in effect, the legislature must expressly, and in clear and unequivocal
language, say so, in the enactment itself. A retrospective operation is not given to a statute, so as
to impair an existing right or obligation, otherwise than as regards matters of procedure unless
that effect cannot be avoided without doing violence to the language of the enactment. If the
enactment is expressed in a language which is capable of either interpretation, it ought to be
construed prospectively.
In Smt. Dayawati v. Inderjit , It was held that "Now as a general proposition, it, may be admitted
that ordinarily a Court of appeal cannot take into account a new law, brought into existence after
the judgment appealed from has been rendered, because the rights of the litigants in an appeal are
determined under the law in force at the date of the suit.
6. Generalia specialibus non derogant - Explain
Ans 6. When two provisions in an enactment cannot be reconciled with each other, they
should be read in a manner so as to give effect to both as per the principle of harmonious
construction. One approach in such cases is to find out which of the two apparently
conflicting provisions is more general and which is more specific and to construe the more
general one as to exclude the more specific. This principle is expressed in the maximums
Generalia specialibus non derogant which means that general things do not derogate from
special things and generalibus specialia derogant which means that special things derogate
from general things. If a special provision is made on a certain matter, that matter is
excluded from the general provision. According to the maxim generalias pecialibus non
derogant, a general act is not construed as repealing a particular or special Act. Even if the
particular Act is earlier in time but if it deals with a special object, a later enacted general
law will not abrogate the particular Act, unless a contrary intention is expressed. This
maxim has been applied to resolving conflicts between
(i) two provisions in an Act
(ii) a provision in the Act and a rule made under the Act
(ii) two different Acts
(iv) two provisions in the Constitution added by two different Constitution Amendment
Acts
(v) statutory rules and statutory orders.
However, this principle is not applied where the two provisions deal with remedies as the
validity of plural remedies cannot be doubted. Even if the two remedies are inconsistent,
they continue to remain available to the person concerned and he can elect one of them.

7. Discuss in brief Heydon’s case.

Ans 7. Mischief rule of interpretation was laid down in the Heydon’s case in the year
1584 . This rule is also known as rule of purposive construction. While disposing a
particular case the court may face difficulty in interpreting certain words, phrases and
sentences of the statutes. When these words phrases and sentences are capable of giving
two or more construction then the rule laid down in Heydon’s case that is mischief rule of
interpretation is to be followed to cut the construction of such words phrases or sentences.

In R.M.D. Chamarbaugwala v. Union of India, the petitioners challenged the provisions of

the Prize Competitions Act, 1955, inter alia, on the ground that the phrase 'prize
 competition' as defined in Section 2(d) of the Act would include not only competitions in
which success depends on chance but also those in which it would depend to a substantial
degree on skill, and therefore the impugned law must fail in respect of both kinds of
competitions. Applying the mischief rule and evaluating the mischief sought to be
remedied, the Supreme Court rejected this contention and held that the legislation had
been with the sole object of regulating and controlling prize competitions of a gambling
nature.

8. ‘A' is accused of offence under NDPS Act and a Narco analysis polygraph test ( lie
detector test) has been conducted without his consent. State which fundamental rights are
violated in the above-mentioned situation?
Ans 8. In the above mentioned situation the fundamental right conferred by Article 20 (3)
of the constitution being the Right against self incrimination as well as the right
guaranteed by Article 21 being The right of life and personal liberty (by virtue of it being
expanded to include protection against cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment) are
violated. The act of conduction of such tests are against the provisions of section 20(3)
which provides for the right of an accused against self-incrimination (which means that no
accused shall be compelled to be a witness against oneself). This has also been particularly
acknowledged by the Hon. Supreme Court in the case of Selvi vs State of Karnataka. The
court has also laid down that strict guidelines prescribed by the National Human Rights
commission have to be strictly adhered to while performing Narco Analysis polygraph
tests, among others.

9. Write a short note on “Welfare legislation and its interpretation”

Ans 9. BENEFICIAL INTERPRETATION IN WELFARE LEGISLATION

When a statute is interpreted liberally and is given the widest possible meaning which the
language permits it is known as Beneficial Interpretation. A beneficial legislation is a
statute which purports to confer a benefit on individuals or a class of persons. The nature
of such benefit is to relieve said persons of onerous obligations under contracts entered
into by them. When a statute is meant for the benefit of a particular class and if a word in
the statute is capable of two meanings i.e., one which would preserve the benefits and one
which would not, then the meaning that preserves the benefit must be adopted. Beneficial
construction is an interpretation to secure remedy to the victim who is unjustly denied of
 relief. The interpretation of a statue should be done in such a way that mischief is
suppressed and remedy is advanced.

GOVERNING PRINCIPLES

In order to interpret a statute beneficially three important principles should be followed:

Words in the statute should be interpreted in its widest form but only to the extent which
the language permits or contains.

The most complete remedy which a particular provision intends should be given.

A statute should always purport to confer benefits on particular class or category for which
the beneficial legislation is intended.

In construing welfare legislation, a liberal approach and a Purposive construction should

be adopted which would effectuate the object of the welfare legislation.

Industrial Disputes Act 1947 is one of welfare statute which intends to bring about peace
and harmony between management and labor in an industry and improve the service
conditions of industrial workers which in will turn accelerate productive activity of the
country resulting in its prosperity.

10. Explain the term “contemporanea – exposition”

Ans 10. Contemporanea expositio est optima et fortissinia in lege: meaning
Contemporaneous exposition is the best and strongest in law. It is said that the best
exposition of a statute or any other document is that which it has received from
contemporary authority.
In construing old statues, the interpretation made by the judges who lived at the time the
were made or soon thereafter must be considered since they would have been best able to
judge the intention of thr makers at that time. It is important to note that the principle of
contemporanea exposition is confined in its application to the construction of ambiguous
language used in very old statutes where the language itself may have had different
meaning. It is not applicable to modern statutes except for use made of contemporary
official statements and statutory instruments. Even if the person who delt with the Act
understood it in a different manner, the court is not prevented from giving effect to the true
construction of the Act
Contemprorary official statements throwing light on the construction of a statue and
statutory instruments made under it have been used as contemporanea expositio to
interpret not only ancient but recent statues too.
In the case of Municipal Corporation for City of Pune V. Bharat Forge Co. Ltd. the
Supreme Court held that the principle of Contemporanea Exposito cannot be used to bring
about an implied repeal or quasi repeal.
The principle of contemporanea exposito is not decisive, it only has persuasive value and
if the circumstances are such interpretation may be disregarded.