Professional Documents
Culture Documents
• Textbooks
• The words used in a statute have undergone alteration in meaning in course of time
• The best way to construe a document is to read it as it would have read when made
• The maxim contemporanea exposito is applicable in construing ancient statutes, but not to
intepreting acts which are comparatively modern.
JK Cotton Spinning and Weaving Mills Ltd and another v Union of India and
Others AIR 1988 SC 191.
The appellant JK Cotton Spinning and weaving Mills Ltd, has a composite mill where it
manufactures fabrics of different types. In order to manufacture the said fabrics, yarn is
obtained at an intermediate stage. The yarn so obtained is further processed in an integrated
process in the composite mill for weaving and the same in to fabrics. The appellants have to
pay the excise duty on the different kinds of fabrics, which are removed from the factory.
Contemporanea expositio est optima et fortissinia in lege
The Collector Central Excise issued a notice under rule 9(1) of the central excse rules to the
appellants demanding to pay central excise on the yarn accumulated at the factory at
intermediate stages.
The appellants contented that they would be held liable to pay central excise only when the
yarn would be removed from factory, but not at intermediate stages, the appellants pleaded
contemporanea exposito.
The supreme court interpreted the central excise rules and gave judgement against the
appellants and dismissed the appeal. The learned counsel relied on support from the decision
in KP Varghese v the Income tax officer, Ernakulam (AIR 1981 SC 1922) for which the court
observed that in the relied case there was ambiguity and a word was capable of two
construction hence the maxim contempranea expositio was applied, but in this case there is
no ambiguity and hence the maxim cannot be imported.
Contemporanea expositio est optima et fortissinia in lege
Not relevant when it comes to application of IPC and partly relevant to Taxation
Contemporanea expositio est optima et fortissinia in lege
Exercise:
The Copyright Act of 1957 was amended to allow for the inclusion of computer-generated
artistic, dramatic, musical, or literary works within its ambit in 1994. As a result, Section
2(d)(v) was added to define "the person who causes the work to be created" as the author of
such "computer-generated works."
To resolve the ambiguous nature of such a term, Section 3(42) of the General Clauses Act of
1897 can be brought in to understand the term "Person" as there is no explanation given
under the Copyright Act to the same. The section claims that "person" shall include any
company or, association or body of individuals, whether incorporated or not.