UNIVERSITY INSTITUTE OF LEGAL STUDIES, PANJAB UNIVERSITY

UNIVERSITY INSTITUTE OF LEGAL STUDIES,

PANJAB UNIVERSITY, CHANDIGARH

PROJECT TOPIC:

BENEFICIAL CONSTRUCTION

SUBMITTED BY:
TANISH DAHUJA 32/18
PRANJALI AGGARWAL 25/18
SIMRANJEET KAUR 39/18
JASMINE 41/18

B.A. LLB. Hons.

6th Semester Section A

INTERPRETATION OF STATUTES PRESENTATION Page | 1

 UNIVERSITY INSTITUTE OF LEGAL STUDIES, PANJAB UNIVERSITY

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

We extend our heartfelt thanks to our teacher and mentor Dr. Tanmeet for giving us an
opportunity to work on this project which helped us to gain extensive knowledge on the
topic of ‘Beneficial Construction’. During the making of the project, we came across
many things apart from the syllabus which proved to be a great learning experience for
us. We thank ma’am for guiding and helping us at all times. Without her support we
would have not been able to complete this project report.

Last but not the least; we thank our friends and our batchmates for their help and
support!

Tanish Dahuja
Pranjali Aggarwal
Simranjeet Kaur
Jasmine

INTERPRETATION OF STATUTES PRESENTATION Page | 2

 UNIVERSITY INSTITUTE OF LEGAL STUDIES, PANJAB UNIVERSITY

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Sr. No. CONTENT Pg. No.

1. Construction 4
2. Rule of Beneficial Construction 4-5
3. Nature of the Rule 6
4. Scope of the Rule 7
5. Illustrations 8-9
6. Limitations to the Rule 10
7. Conclusion 11
8. References 12

INTERPRETATION OF STATUTES PRESENTATION Page | 3

 UNIVERSITY INSTITUTE OF LEGAL STUDIES, PANJAB UNIVERSITY

What is ‘CONSTRUCTION’?
Construction is the process of drawing conclusions of the subjects which are beyond
the direct expression of the statute. The Courts draw findings after analyzing the
meaning of the words used in the statute. In other words, construction means drawing
conclusions on the basis of true spirit of the statute, even though the same does not
appear if the words used in the statute are given their natural meaning.
The objective is to assist the judicial body in determining the real intention of the
legislature. Its aim is also to ascertain the legal effect of the statute.

Difference between Interpretation and Construction:

Interpretation differs from construction. Interpretation refers to finding out the true
sense of provisions of statutes and to understand the direct meaning of words used in
any text. Whereas Construction refers to drawing conclusions from statutes which are
beyond the outright expression of the legal text in the case where simple meaning of the
text is to be adopted then the concept of interpretation is being referred to. But where
the literal meaning of the legal text results in ambiguity then the concept of Construction
is adopted.

RULE OF BENEFICIAL CONSTRUCTION:

The Principle of Beneficial Construction of Statute has an important place in

Interpretation Statutes. Generally, every act has been enacted for the protection of
interests of one or the other class. In such a situation, it is essential that it should be
interpreted in such a way that such interest one protected. This purpose has led to the
origin of The Principle of Beneficial Construction of Statute.

Where any act has been framed to protect the interest of two opposite classes, there
should be interpreted in such a way that both the classes interest remains safe.
Thus, it could be said that Beneficent construction involves giving the widest meaning
possible to the statutes. When there are two or more possible ways of interpreting a
section or a word, the meaning which gives relief and protects the benefits which are
purported to be given by the legislation, should be chosen. A beneficial statute has to be
construed in its correct perspective so as to fructify the legislative intent. Although
beneficial legislation does receive liberal interpretation, the courts try to remain within
the scheme and not extend the benefit to those not covered by the scheme. It is also true
that once the provision envisages the conferment of benefit limited in point of time and
INTERPRETATION OF STATUTES PRESENTATION Page | 4
 UNIVERSITY INSTITUTE OF LEGAL STUDIES, PANJAB UNIVERSITY

subject to the fulfillment of certain conditions, their non-compliance will have the effect
of nullifying the benefit. There should be due stress and emphasis to Directive Principles
of State Policy and any international convention on the subject.

There is no set principle of construction that a beneficial legislation should always be

retrospectively operated although such legislation such legislation is either expressly or
by necessary intendment not made retrospective. Further, the rule of interpretation can
only be resorted to without doing any violence to the language of the statute. In case of
any exception when the implementation of the beneficent act is restricted the Court
would construe it narrowly so as not to unduly expand the area or scope of exception.
The liberal construction can only flow from the language of the act and there cannot be
placing of unnatural interpretation on the words contained in the enactment. Also,
beneficial construction does not permit rising of any presumption that protection of
widest amplitude must be deemed to have been conferred on those for whose benefit the
legislation may have been enacted.

Beneficial Construction of statutes have enormously played an important role in the

development and beneficial interpretation of socio – economic legislations and have
always encouraged the Indian legislators to make more laws in favor of the backward
class of people in India.

Importance of the rule

• The interest of that class is protected for whose protection the Act or Statute is
enacted.

• The statute is primarily construed for the benefit of such class, person, or group
for whose protection it is enacted.

• In case of construction of words leading to more than one meaning, there that
meaning is adopted which is beneficial.

• Where there is conflict or contradiction between two constructions, there that

construction id adopted which is beneficial to the party related to it.

• A balanced is maintained between two contradictory constructions.

INTERPRETATION OF STATUTES PRESENTATION Page | 5
 UNIVERSITY INSTITUTE OF LEGAL STUDIES, PANJAB UNIVERSITY

NATURE OF THE RULE:

The nature of beneficial construction is remedial in nature as it applies to supress the

mischief and advances the remedy. The basic characteristics of remedial Statute is that
it receives liberal construction and doubt is resolved in the favour of the persons for
whose benefit the statute is enacted.1
According to Maxwell- Beneficial Construction is a tendency and not a rule. 2 The
reason is that this principle is based on human tendency to be fair, accommodating, and
just. He says that—"Modern Judgements show a behavior to reduce the difference
between Beneficial and Strict Interpretation. All Statutes are carefully interpreted while
considering the language used in them. The Interpretation of Criminal Statutes are
specially interpreted while considering the intention of the legislature.” Now there is a
strong belief that Statutes should be interpreted for the interest of individual freedom.3
Rather than limiting who can benefit from the statute, the Court tends to include as
many classes as possible while remaining faithful to the or wordings or meaning of
statute.
In the case of Alembic Chemical Works v Workman,4 the industrial tribunal granted
workers greater paid leave than the Factories Act's Section 79(1) recommended. The
appellant argued that this was incorrect. The Supreme Court decided that because the
Act was intended to help employees, it had to be framed in their advantage, and that if
the terms might have two interpretations, the one that benefits employees must be
adopted.
When a statute is intended to benefit a certain group, and a word in the statute has two
possible interpretations, one of which preserves the benefits and the other of which does
not, the meaning that preserves the benefits must be selected or adopted, and the court
of law must follow it.
Similarly, if the legislature's language fails to fulfil a statute's objective, an extended
meaning might be given to it to achieve that objective provided the language is fairly
susceptible to the extended meaning.

1
Bhattacharyya, T., “The Interpretation of Statutes”, (2014) at pg. 7.
2
Maxwell, Interpretation of Statutes, Twelfth Edition, p.92.
3
Ibid.
4
AIR 1961 SC 647.

INTERPRETATION OF STATUTES PRESENTATION Page | 6

 UNIVERSITY INSTITUTE OF LEGAL STUDIES, PANJAB UNIVERSITY

SCOPE OF THE RULE:

Beneficial construction widen the scope of interpretation and allows the court to choose
for a wider connotation, allowing beneficiaries to fall under its extensive reach in order
to achieve the legislature's goal.
It is required to be construed liberally the statutes when the Act provides for beneficial
consequences.5 The Beneficial rule further extends the Court’s view to use purposive
construction and in Prafulla Samantra v. Ministry of Environment & Forests 6 case Delhi
High Court held that ‘A well-established rule of interpretation is that a beneficial statute
be given a purposive construction, to further legislative intention, if literal interpretation
thwarts.’
Rule of Beneficial construction applies to a large number of statutes which ranges from
welfare legislations like Rent controls, Tenancy Act, Debts Adjustment Act, Hindu
Adoption and Maintenance Act etc. to Socio – economic and Labour Legislation like
Unfair Labour Practice Act, Motor Vehicles Act, Industrial Disputes Act, Contract
Labour Act, Maternity Benefit Act, Minimum wages Act etc.

The scope of this rule is not limited to only welfare legislations and socio-economic
legislations but even criminal statutes, which are subject of strict construction, construed
according to rule of beneficial legislation.
Even in England extended or wider interpretation has been given in the case of some
criminal statutes, in order to fulfil the statute's objective. Similar trend also seen in many
Indian cases, Tola Ram v. The State of Bombay 7 is one of them. In this case court
observed that it is well settled rule of construction of penal statutes that if two possible
and reasonable constructions can be put upon penal provision, the court must lean
towards that construction which exempts the subject from penalty rather than the one
which imposes a penalty.

5
Bindra, N.S., “Interpretation of Statute”, (2017) at pg. 807.
6
159 (2009) DLT 604.
7
AIR 1954 SC 496.

INTERPRETATION OF STATUTES PRESENTATION Page | 7

 UNIVERSITY INSTITUTE OF LEGAL STUDIES, PANJAB UNIVERSITY

ILLUSTRATIONS

1. In the landmark case of B. Shah v. Presiding Officer,8 Court applied beneficent

rule of construction in construing section 5 of the Maternity Benefit Act, 1961,
which makes the employer liable to pay maternity benefit to woman worker at the
rate of average daily wage for the period of her actual absence immediately
preceding and including the day of her delivery and for six weeks immediately
following that day. The court held that Sundays must also be included and held
that the Act was intended not only to subsist but also make up for her dissipated
energy and take care of child. The Act was read in the light of Article 42.

2. In Union of India v. Prabhakaran Vijay Kumar,9 one of the leading examples of

liberal construction is in the interpretation of Section 123 of Railways Act 1989
which defined ‘untoward accident’ to include ‘accidental falling of a passenger
from a train carrying passengers. The question in contention before the court was
whether ‘untoward accident’ will cover the instance of a passenger who fell down
and died while trying to board the train. In deciding the case, the court said that
there are couple of interpretations of ‘accidental falling’; first one being that it
only applies when a person is inside the train while second includes a situation
where person is trying to board a train and falls down. The relevant provision was
deemed as a beneficial piece of legislation and hence received liberal and wide
interpretation and hence the definition was expanded to include a passenger who
fell off the train in the process of boarding it.

3. In Manohar Lal v. State of Punjab,10 Section 7 of the Punjab Trade Employees

Act, 1949 directing that shops and establishments to which the Act applied shall
remain closed one day in a week was held not to violate Article 19(1) (g) of the
Constitution as it was a reasonable restriction on the fundamental right because it
ensures health and efficiency of the worker. The position would be same even if
the business is being conducted by the owner and his family members. On similar
grounds, hours of employment of employees and opening and closing hours of
shops or establishments cannot be held as violative of fundamental right of trade
and business under Article 19(1) (g).

8
AIR 1978 SC 12.
9
(2008) 9 SCC 527.
10
AIR 1961 SC 418.

INTERPRETATION OF STATUTES PRESENTATION Page | 8

 UNIVERSITY INSTITUTE OF LEGAL STUDIES, PANJAB UNIVERSITY

4. In U. Unichoyi v. State of Kerala,11 a very interesting question arose in this case.

the state government was empowered under the Minimum Wages Act. 1948 to fix
the Minimum Wages in an industry. The argument was that this provision was
violative of Article 19 (l) (g) of the constitution. Because-
• It did not define the word ‘minimum wages’. and
• No provision for taking into consideration the capacity of the employers to pay
minimum wages.

The Supreme Court rejected this argument and said that—This Act is a Beneficial
Legislation and hence it should be construed in the interest of laborers and workmen. If
it is not done so then in an underdeveloped country like India which faces the problems
of unemployment on a very large scale, the labor may offer to work even on starvation
wages, and this shall not be correct.

5. In Diwan Brothers v. Central Bank of India,12 the Tribunal dismissed under the
displaced persons (Debts Adjustment) Act, 1951 a claim of the appellant of a large
amount of money by way of security deposits and commission from the
respondent. An appeal was preferred in the High Court, with a nominal court fee
of rupees five only, against the verdict of the Tribunal. The High Court thought
that an ad valorem court fee should be paid by the appellant. The Supreme Court
held that the High Court’s notion that ad valorem court fee should be paid in the
present case was wrong. It was observed that the present statute was a beneficial
legislation with the purpose of advancing the interests of such debtors and
creditors who were displaced persons. The legislature would never have intended
while passing this Act that displaced persons, while settling their claims in the
Tribunal or preferring appeals against the orders of the Tribunal should be required
to pay a large amount of as court fee. The statute, therefore, had to be beneficially
construed.

11
AIR 1962 SC 12.
12
AIR 1976 SC 1503.

INTERPRETATION OF STATUTES PRESENTATION Page | 9

 UNIVERSITY INSTITUTE OF LEGAL STUDIES, PANJAB UNIVERSITY

LIMITATIONS TO THE RULE

If on the application of the rule of beneficial construction, the court finds that it is doing
complete justice and delivering a fair judgment then there is no question of why should
not such rule is applied? But there are certain restrictions which the court has to take
care of which at the time of application have to be adhered to –

1. Where the courts find that by the application of the rule of beneficial construction, it
would be re-legislating a provision of statute either by substituting, adding or altering
any provision of the act.

2. Where any word in a statute confers to a single meaning only. Then the courts should
refrain from applying the rule of benevolent construction to the statute.

3. When there is no ambiguity in a provision of a statute so construed. If the provision

is plain, unambiguous and does not give rise to any doubt, the rule of beneficial
construction cannot be applied. It can only be applied without “rewriting or doing
violence to the enactment”. When the language is clear and explicit, it leaves little
scope for any bending of interpretation.13

4. The beneficial legislation should not be construed such that it brings within its ambit
a benefit which was not contemplated by legislature.14

5. Sympathy cannot be a sole principle guiding interpretation.15 In the Secretary State

of Karnataka v Umadevi case,16 the Supreme Court held that those employed on
daily wages temporarily or on contractual basis by State or its instrumentalities
cannot be said to be holders of a post and have no right to regularization simply
because they have worked for a number of years. This decision shows that sympathy
or sentiment cannot be the sole ground for passing a favorable order when there is
no legal right to support such an order.

13
Steel Authority of India Ltd v. National Union Water Front Workers AIR 2001 SC 3527.
14
Dedappa v. National Insurance Co LTD (2008) 2 SCC 595.
15
Maruti Udyog Ltd. v. Remlap (2005) 2 SCC 638.
16
(2006) 4 SCC 1.

INTERPRETATION OF STATUTES PRESENTATION Page | 10

 UNIVERSITY INSTITUTE OF LEGAL STUDIES, PANJAB UNIVERSITY

CONCLUSION

When two or more views are possible, then it is duty of court to interpret a provision,
especially a beneficial legislation, liberally so as to give it wide meaning rather than a
restrictive meaning. It applies to a large number of statutes which ranges from welfare
legislations to Socio–economic and Labour Legislation. In simple words when
beneficent objectives found or beneficial consequences requires, the interpretation
bends towards beneficial construction. A well-established rule of interpretation is that a
beneficial statute be given a purposive construction, to further legislative intention. As
it clear that the beneficial construction being a tendency rather than only rule and are
used by court in interpreting the beneficial statutes in wider sense but it does not permit
to legislate the law by judicially.

Beneficial Construction of statutes have enormously played an important role in the

development and beneficial interpretation of socio-economic legislation and have
always encouraged the Indian legislators to make more laws in favour of the backward
class of people in India.

INTERPRETATION OF STATUTES PRESENTATION Page | 11

 UNIVERSITY INSTITUTE OF LEGAL STUDIES, PANJAB UNIVERSITY

References

• Bindra, N.S., “Interpretation of Statutes” (2017).

• Bhattacharyya, T., “The Interpretation of Statutes” (2014).

• Maxwell, “On the Interpretation of Statutes” (2004).

• Mathur, D.N., “Interpretation of Statutes” (2008).

• http://www.legalservicesindia.com/article/1941/Harmonious-and-
Beneficial-Construction..html accessed on 12th June, 2021 at 5:00
p.m.

• https://www.legalbites.in/rules-of-construction/ accessed on 12th June,

2021 at 6:30 p.m.

INTERPRETATION OF STATUTES PRESENTATION Page | 12