Interpretation of Statutes – CA Inter Law Study Material

Interpretation of Statutes – CA Inter Law Study Material is designed strictly as per the latest syllabus and exam pattern.

Interpretation of Statutes – CA Inter Law Study Material

Meaning of Important Terms

Question 1.
Give the difference between interpretation and construction. [MTP-March 18, March 21]
Answer:
Difference between Interpretation and Construction:
More often the two terms are used interchangeably to denote a process adopted by the courts to ascertain the meaning of the legislature from the words with which it is expressed, these two terms have different connotations.

Interpretation is the art of ascertaining the meaning of words and the true sense in which the author intended that they should be understood. It is the drawing of conclusions from a statute that lie beyond the direct expression of the words used therein. It is the duty of the courts to give effect to the meaning of an Act when the meaning can be equitably gathered from the words used. Words of legal import occurring in a statute which have acquired a definite and precise sense, must be understood in that sense.

Thus, where the Court adheres to the plain meaning of the language used by the legislature, it would be ‘interpretation’ of the words, but where the meaning is not plain, the court has to decide whether the wording was meant to cover the situation before the court. Here, the court would be resorting to ‘construction’. Conclusions drawn by means of construction are within the spirit though not necessarily within the letter of the law.

In practice construction includes interpretation and the terms are frequently used synonymously.

Question 2.
Explain die principles of “Grammatical Interpretation” and “Logical Interpretation” of a Statute. What are the duties of a court in this regard? [MTP-March 19, March 21]
Answer:
Principles of Grammatical Interpretation and Logical Interpretation:
In order to ascertain the meaning of any law/statute the principles of Grammatical and Logical Interpretation is applied to conclude the real meaning of the law and the intention of the legislature behind enacting it.

Meaning: Grammatical interpretation concerns itself exclusively with the verbal expression of law. It does not go beyond the letter of the law, whereas Logical interpretation on the other hand, seeks more satisfactory evidence of the true intention of the legislature.

Application of the principles in the court:

In all ordinary cases, the grammatical interpretation is the sole form allowable. The court cannot delete or add to modify the letter of the law.
However, where the letter of the law is logically defective on account of ambiguity, inconsistency or incompleteness, the court is under a duty to travel beyond the letter of law so as to determine the true intentions of the legislature. So that a statute is enforceable at law, however, unreasonable it may be. The duty of the court is to administer the law as it stands rather it is just or unreasonable.
However, if there are two possible constructions of a clause, the courts may prefer the logical construction which emerges from the setting in which the clause appears and the circumstances in which it came to be enacted and also the words used therein.

Question 3.
Define Grammatical Interpretation. What are the exceptions to grammatical interpretation? [May 18 (4 Marks)]
Answer:
Grammatical Interpretation and its exceptions:
‘Grammatical interpretation’ concerns itself exclusively with the verbal expression of the law, it does not go beyond the letter of the law. In all ordinary cases, ‘grammatical interpretation’ is the sole form allowable. The Court cannot take from or add to modify the letter of the law.

This rule, however, is subject to some exceptions:
(1) Where the letter of the law is logically defective on account of ambiguity, inconsistency or incompleteness. As regard the defect to ambiguity, the Court is under a duty to travel beyond the letter of the law so as to determine from the other sources the true intention of the legislature. In the case of the statutory expression being defective on account of inconsistency, the court must ascertain the spirit of the law.

(2) If the text leads to a result which is so unreasonable that it is self-evident that the legislature could not mean what it says, the court may resolve such impasse by inferring logically the intention of the legislature.

Question 4.
What is a Document as per the Indian Evidence Act, 1872? [May 18 (2 Marks)]
Answer:
Meaning of Document as per Indian the Evidence Act, 1872:

A document is a paper or other material thing giving information, proof or evidence of anything.
Sec. 3 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 states that ‘document’ means any matter expressed or described upon any substance by means of letters, figures or marks or by more than one of those means, intended to be used, or which may be used, for the purpose of recording that matter.

For Example: A writing is a document, any words printed, photographed are documents.

Question 5.
How will you interpret the term “Instrument’’ used in a statutes? [Nov. 19 (3 Marks)]
Answer:
Meaning of‘Instrument’:

Instrument means a formal legal document which creates or confirms a right or records a fact. It is a formal writing of any kind, such as an agreement, deed, charter or record, drawn up and executed in a technical form.
It also means a formal legal document having legal effect, either as creating a right or liability or as affording evidence of it.
Sec. 2(14] of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 states that ‘instrument’ includes every document by which any right or liability is or purports to be created, transferred, extended, extinguished or recorded.

Rules of Interpretation/Construction

Question 6.
Explain how does ‘natural and grammatical meaning* helps in the interpretation of a statute? [MTP-March 18]
Answer:
Use of natural and grammatical meaning* helps in the interpretation of a statute:

Statutes are to be first understood in their natural, ordinary, or popular sense and must be construed according to their plain, literal and grammatical meaning.
If there is an inconsistency with any express intention or declared purpose of the statute, or it involves any absurdity, repugnancy, inconsistency, the grammatical sense must then be modified, extended or abridged only to avoid such an inconvenience, but no further.

Example: In a question before the court whether the sale of betel leaves was subject to sales tax. In this matter the Supreme Court held that betel leaves could not be given the dictionary, technical or botanical meaning when the ordinary and natural meaning is clear and unambiguous. Being the word of everyday use it must be understood in its popular sense by which people are conversant with it as also the meaning which the statute dealing with the matter would attribute to it. Therefore, the sale of betel leaves was liable to sale tax.

Question 7.
Briefly explain the meaning and application of the rule of “Harmonious Construction” in the interpretation of statutes? [MTP-Aug. 18]
Answer:
Meaning of rule of Harmonious Construction:
According to the Rule of Harmonious Construction, when there is doubt about the meaning of the words of a statute, these should be understood in the sense in which they harmonies with the subject of the enactment and the object which the legislature had in view.

Where there are in an enactment two or more provisions which cannot be reconciled with each other, they should be so interpreted, wherever possible, as to give effect to all of them.

It must always be borne in mind that a statute is passed as a whole and not in sections and it may well be assumed to be animated by one general purpose and intent. The Court’s duty is to give effect to all the parts of a statute, if possible. But this general principle is meant to guide the courts in furthering the intent of the legislature, not overriding it.

Application of the Rule:

The Rule of Harmonious Construction is applicable only when there is a real and not merely apparent conflict between the provisions of an Act, and one of them has not been made subject to the other.
When after having construed their context, the words are capable of only a single meaning, the rule of harmonious construction disappears and is replaced by the rule of literal construction.

Question 8.
Explain ‘Mischieve Rule’ for interpretation of statute. Also, give four matters it considers in construing an Act. [Nov. 18 (4 Marks); MTP-Oct 19, Oct 20; Dec. 21 (3 Marks)]
Or
Explain the rule in ‘Heydon’s Case’ while interpreting the statutes quoting an example. [MTP-March 21]
Answer:
Mischieve Rule:

Where the language used in a statute is capable of more than one interpretation, the most firmly established rule for construction is the principle laid down in Heydon’s case.
The intention of this rule is always to make such construction as shall suppress the mischief and advance the remedy according to the true intention of the legislation.
In Heydon’s case, it was laid down that “for the true and sure interpretation of all statutes in general, four things are to be discerned and considered:
1. What was the law before the making of the act?
2. What was the defect, mischief, hardship caused by the earlier law?
3. How does the act of Parliament seek to resolve or cure the mischief or deficiency?
4. What are the true reasons for the remedy?
It has been emphasized by the Supreme Court that the rule in Heydon’s case is applicable only when the words used are ambiguous and are reasonably capable of more than one meaning.

Question 9.
Explain the rule of ‘beneficial construction’. [MTP-April 19]
Answer:
Rule of Beneficial Construction:

This is strictly speaking not a rule but a method of interpreting a provision liberally so as to give effect to the declared intention of the legislation.
Beneficial construction will be given to a statute, which brings into effect provisions for improving the conditions of certain classes of people who are under privileged or who have not been treated fairly in the past.
In such cases it is permissible to give an extended meaning to words or clauses in enactments. But this can only be done when two constructions are reasonably possible and not when the words in a statute are quite unequivocal.

Question 10.
Differentiate Mandatory Provision from a Directory Provision. What factors decide whether a provision is directory or mandatory? [MTP-April 21, May 18 (4 Marks)]
Or
How will you understand whether a provision in a statute is ‘mandatory’ or ‘directory’? [May 19 (3 Marks)]
Answer:
Mandatory Provision vs Directory Provision:
Practically speaking, the distinction between a provision which is ‘mandatory’ and one which is ‘directory’ is that when it is mandatory, it must be strictly observed; when it is ‘directory’ it would be sufficient that it is substantially complied with.

However, we have to look to the substance and not merely the form, an enactment in mandatory form might substantially be directory and, conversely, a statute in directory form may in substance
be mandatory. Hence, it is the substance that counts and must take precedence over mere form.

If a provision gives a power coupled with a duty, it is mandatory: whether it is or is not so would depend on such consideration as:

the nature of the thing empowered to be done,
the object for which it is done, and
the person for whose benefit the power is to be exercised

Question 11.
The meaning of a word is to be Judged by the company it keeps’. Explain the concept of ‘Nosdtur A Sociis’. [MTP-May 20]
Answer:
‘Noscitur A Sociis’:
Noscitur a Sociis means that when two or more words that are susceptible of analogous meaning, are coupled together they are understood to be used in their cognate sense. They take, as it were, their colour from each other, that is the meaning of the more general word being restricted to a sense analogous to that of the less general.

Examples of the principal of Noscitur a Sociis are as follows:
(a) Fresh orange juice is not a fruit juice: While dealing with a Purchase Tax Act, which used the expression “manufactured beverages including fruit-juices and bottled waters and syrups,” it was held that the description ‘fruit juices’ as occurring therein should be construed in the context of the preceding words and that orange-juice unsweetened and freshly pressed was not within the description.

(b) Private Dispensary of a doctor is not a commercial establishment: In dealing with the definition of commercial establishment in Sec. 2(4) of the Bombay Shops and Establishments Act, 1948, which reads, “commercial establishment means an establishment which carries on any business, trade or profession”, the word ‘profession’ was construed with the associated words ‘business’ and ‘trade’ and it was held that a private dispensary of a doctor was not within the definition.

Question 12.
“Associate words to be understood in common sense maimer.” Explain this statement with reference to rales of interpretation of statutes. [Nov. 20(3 Marks), MTP-March 22]
Answer:
Associated Words to be Understood in Common Sense Manner:
When two words or expressions are coupled together one of which generally excludes the other, obviously the more general term is used in a meaning excluding the specific one.

On the other hand, there is the concept of ‘Noscitur A Sociis’ (‘it is known by its associates’), that is to say ‘the meaning of a word is to be judged by the company it keeps’. When two or more words which are capable of analogous (similar or parallel) meaning are coupled together, they are to be understood in their cognate sense (i.e. akin in origin, nature or quality). They take, as it were, their colour from each other, i.e., the more general is restricted to a sense analogous to the less general.

It is a rule wider than the rule of ejusdem generis, rather ejusdem generis is only an application of the noscitur a sociis. It must be borne in mind that noscitur a sociis, is merely a rule of construction and it cannot prevail in cases where it is clear that the wider words have been deliberately used in order to make the scope of the defined word correspondingly wider.

Question 13.
Sohel, a director of a Company, not being personally concerned or Interested, financially or otherwise, in a matter of a proposed motion placed before file Board Meeting, did not disclose his interest although he has knowledge that his sister is interested in that proposal. He restrains from making any disclosure of his interest on the presumption that he is not required by law to disclose any interest as be is not personally interested or concerned in the proposal. He made his presumption relying on the ‘Rule of Literal Construction’. Explaining the scope of interpretation under this rule in the given situation, decide whether the decision of Sohel is correct? [Jan, 21 (3 Marks)]
Answer:
Rule of Literal Construction:
Normally, where the words of a statute are in themselves clear and unambiguous, then these words should be construed in their natural and ordinary sense and it is not open to the court to adopt any other hypothetical construction. This is called the rule of literal construction.

This principle is contained in the Latin maxim “absoluta sententia expositore non indeget” which literally means “an absolute sentence or preposition needs not an expositor”. In other words, plain words require no explanation.

Sometimes, occasions may arise when a choice has to be made between two interpretations – one narrower and the other wider or bolder. In such a situation, if the narrower interpretation would fail to achieve the manifest purpose of the legislation, one should rather adopt the wider one.

When we talk of disclosure of ‘the nature of concern or interest, financial or otherwise’ of a director or the manager of a company in the subject-matter of a proposed motion (as referred to in sec. 102 of the Companies Act, 2013), we have to interpret in its broader sense of referring to any concern or interest containing any information and facts that may enable members to understand the meaning, scope and implications of the items of business and to take decisions thereon.

What is required is a full and frank disclosure without reservation or suppression, as, for instance where a son or daughter or father or mother or brother or sister is concerned in any contract or matter, the shareholders ought fairly to be informed of it and the material facts disclosed to them. Here a restricted narrow interpretation would defeat the very purpose of the disclosure.

In the given question, Sohel (a director) did not disclose his interest in a matter placed before the Board Meeting (in which his sister has interest), as he is not personally interested or concerned in the proposal.

Here, he ought to have considered broader meaning of the provision of law; and therefore, even though he was personally not interested or concerned in the proposal, he should have disclosed the interest.

Question 14.
Ayush and Vipul are good friends and pursuing CA course. White doing group studies for the paper of “Corporate and Other Law”, they are confused about the provisions of section 3 of the Companies Act 2013. Section 3 provides “A company may be formed for any lawful purpose by…….. ’’ Both Ayush and Vipul are in difficulty about the meaning of word “may”. Whether it should be taken as mandatory or directory? [RTP-May 22]
Answer:
Use of word “May” and “Shall”:
The word ‘shall’ is used to raise a presumption of something which is mandatory or imperative while the word ‘may’ is used to connote something which is not mandatory but is only directory or enabling. However, sometimes Word ‘may’ has a mandatory force if directory force will defeat the object of the Act. However, sometimes the words “may and shall” can be interpreted interchangeably depending on the intention of the legislator.

In the given situation, Ayush and Vipul, are confused with the language of the provisions of section 3 of the Companies Act 2013 that whether the word “may” used in section should be considered as mandatory or directory.

In this situation, it can be said that the word “may” should be taken as mandatory force, because the law will never allow the formation of company with unlawful object. Here the word used “may” shall be read as “shall”. Usage of word ‘may’ here makes it mandatory for a company for the compliance of section 3 for its formation.

Internal Aids to Interpretation/Construction

Question 15.
Explain the meaning of term ‘Proviso’. Give the distinction between proviso, exception and Saving Clause. [RTP-May 18]
Or
Many a time a proviso is added to a Section of the enactment Explain the function of such a proviso in the interpretation of the section/provision. [RTP-May 19]
Or
Explain the function of’proviso’ as an internal aid to construction. [RTP-May 20]
Or
Write a short note on “Proviso” with reference to the rules of interpretation. [Nov. 20 (3 Marks)]
Answer:
Meaning of term ‘Proviso’:
The normal function of a proviso is to except something out of the enactment or to qualify something stated in the enactment which would be within its purview if the proviso were not there. The effect of the proviso is to qualify the preceding enactment which is expressed in terms which are too general. As a general rule, a proviso is added to an enactment to qualify or create an exception to what is in the enactment. Ordinarily a proviso is not interpreted as stating a general rule.

It is a cardinal rule of interpretation that a proviso to a particular provision of a statute only embraces the field which is covered by the main provision. It carves out an exception to the main provision to which it has been enacted as a proviso and to no other. (Ram Narain Sons Ltd. vs. Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax).

Distinction between Proviso, exception and saving Clause
There is said to exist difference between provisions worded as ‘Proviso’, ’Exception’, or ‘Saving Clause’.

‘Proviso’ is used to remove special cases from general enactment and provide for them specially.
‘Exception’ is intended to restrain the enacting clause to particular cases.
‘Saving clause’ is used to preserve from destruction certain rights, remedies or privileges already existing.

Question 16.
How far are (i) title and (ii) preamble in an enactment helpful In interpreting any of the parts of an enactment? [MTP-Aug 18]
Or
How far is ‘preamble’ in an enactment helpful in interpreting any of the parts of an enactment? [MTP-March 19]
Answer:
(i) Title: An enactment would have what is known as ‘Short Title’ and also a ‘Long Title’. The short title merely identifies the enactment and is chosen merely for convenience. The ‘Long title’ describes the enactment and does not merely identify it The Long title is a part of the Act and, therefore, can be referred to for ascertaining the object and scope of the Act.

(ii) Preamble: It expresses the scope and object of the Act more comprehensively than the long title. The preamble may recite the ground and the cause for making a statute and or the evil which is sought to the remedied by it.

The preamble like the Long title can legitimately be used for construing it. However, the preamble cannot over ride the provisions of the Act. Only if the wording of the Act gives rise to doubts as to its proper construction (e.g., where the words or a phrase has more than the one meaning and doubts arise as to which of the two meanings is intended in the Act) the preamble can and ought to be referred to arrive at the proper construction.

Question 17.
How far are ‘marginal notes’ in an enactment helpful in interpreting any of tbe parts of an enactment? [MTP-Oct. 18]
Answer:
Use of Marginal Notes:

Marginal notes are summaries and side notes often found at the side of a section or group of sections in an act, purporting to sum up the effect of that section or sections.
They are not a part of the enactment, for they were not present when the Act was passed in Parliament, but inserted after the act has been so passed. Hence they are not an aid to construction.
In C.I.T. vs. Ahmedbhai Umarbhai & Co. it was held that Marginal notes in an Indian statute, as in an Act, of Parliament cannot be referred to for the purpose of construing the statute and the same view has been taken in many other cases. Many cases show that reference to marginal notes may be permissible in exceptional cases for construing a section in a statute.
However, marginal notes appended to Articles of the Constitution have been held to be part of the Constitution as passed by the Constituent Assembly and therefore have been used in construing the Articles.

Question 18.
The ‘Statute should be read as a Whole’. Explain the statement [RTP-Nov. 18]
Answer:
‘Read the Statute as a Whole’:
It is the elementary principle that construction of a statute is to be made of all its parts taken together and not of one part only. The deed/ statute must be read as a whole in order to ascertain the true meaning of its several clauses, and the words of each clause should be so interpreted as to bring them into harmony with other provisions – if that interpretation does no violence to the meaning of which they are naturally susceptible. And the same approach would apply with equal force with regard to Acts and Rules passed by the legislature.

One of the safest guides to the construction of sweeping general words is to examine other words of like import in the same enactment or instrument to see what limitations must be imposed on them. If we find that a number of such expressions have to be subjected to limitations and qualifications and that such limitations and qualifications are of the same nature, that circumstance forms a strong argument for subjecting the expression in dispute to a similar limitation and qualification.

Question 19.
Write short notes on:
(i) Proviso
(ii) Explanation,
with reference to interpretation of Statutes, Deeds and Documents. [Nov. 18 (3 Marks), MTP-March 22]
Answer:
(i) Proviso: The normal function of a proviso is to except something out of the enactment or to qualify something stated in the enactment which would be within its purview if the proviso were not there. The effect of the proviso is to qualify the preceding enactment which is expressed in terms which are too general. As a general rule, a proviso is added to an enactment to qualify or create an exception to what is in the enactment. Ordinarily a proviso is not interpreted as stating a general rule.

It is a cardinal rule of interpretation that a proviso to a particular provision of a statute only embraces the field which is covered by the main provision.

(ii) Explanation: An Explanation is at times appended to a section to explain the meaning of the text of the section. An Explanation may be added to include something within the section or to exclude something from it. An Explanation should normally be so read as to harmonise with and clear up any ambiguity in the main section. It should not be so construed as to widen the ambit of the section. The meaning to be given to an explanation will really depend upon its terms and not on any theory of its purpose.

Question 20.
Preamble does net override the plain provision of the Act’ Comment Also give suitable example. [May 19 (3 Marks), RTP-Nov. 20]
Answer:
Preamble:
The Preamble expresses the scope, object and purpose of the Act more comprehensively. The Preamble of a Statute is a part of the enactment and can legitimately be used as an internal aid for construing it. However, the Preamble does not override the plain provision of the Act.

But if the wording of the statute gives rise to doubts as to its proper construction, for example, where the words or phrase has more than one meaning and a doubt arises as to which of the two meanings is intended in the Act, the Preamble can and ought to be referred to in order to arrive at the proper construction.

In short, the Preamble to an Act discloses the primary intention of the legislature but can only be brought in as an aid to construction if the language of the statute is not clear. However, it cannot override the provisions of the enactment.

Example: Use of the word ‘may’ in Sec. 5 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 provides that “a marriage may be solemnized between two Hindus ………..” has been construed to be mandatory in the sense that both parties to the marriage must be Hindus as defined in Sec. 2 of the Act. It was held that a marriage between a Christian male and a Hindu female solemnized under the Hindu Marriage Act was void. This result was reached also having regard to the preamble of the Act which reads: ‘An Act to amend and codify the law relating to marriage among Hindus’.

Question 21.
If It is defined as:
(i) “Company means a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 2013 or under any previous company Law”.
(ii) “Person” includes, __________ under the Consumer Protection Act,1986.
How would you interpret/construct the nature and scope of the above definitions? [May 19 [3 Maths)]
Answer:
Restrictive and extensive definitions:

The definition of a word or expression in the definition section may either be restricting of its ordinary meaning or may be extensive of the same.
When a word is defined to ‘mean’ such and such, the definition is ‘prima facie’ restrictive and exhaustive, we must restrict the meaning of the word to that given in the definition section.
But where the word is defined to ‘include’ such and such, the definition is ‘prima facie’ extensive: here the word defined is not restricted to the meaning assigned to it but has extensive meaning which also includes the meaning assigned to it in the definition section.
Thus,
1. The definition is restrictive and exhaustive to the effect that only an entity incorporated under the Companies Act, 2013 or under any previous Companies Act, shall deemed to be company.
2. The definition is inclusive in nature, thereby the meaning assigned to the respective word (here ‘person’) is extensive. It has a wider scope to include other terms into the ambit of the definition having regard to the object of the definition.

Question 22.
How will you interpret the definitions in a statute, if the following words are used in a statute?
(i) Means,
(ii) Includes
Give one illustration for each of the above from statutes you are familiar with. [MTP-May 20]
Or
Explain the impact of the two words “means” and “includes” in a definition, while interpreting such definition. [July 21(3 Marks)]
Answer:
Interpretation of the words “Means” and “Includes” in the definitions:

The definition of a word or expression in the definition section may either be restricting of its ordinary meaning or may be extensive of the same.
When a word is defined to ‘mean’ such and such, the definition is ‘prima facie’ restrictive and exhaustive, we must restrict the meaning of the word to that given in the definition section.
But where the word is defined to ‘include’ such and such, the definition is ‘prima facie’ extensive, here the word defined is not restricted to the meaning assigned to it but has extensive meaning which also includes the meaning assigned to it in the definition section.

Example:
Definition of Director [Sec. 2(34) of the Companies Act, 2013]: Director means a director appointed to the board of a company. The word “means” suggests exhaustive definition.

Definition of Whole time director [Sec. 2(94) of the Companies Act, 2013]: Whole time director includes a director in the whole time employment of the company. The word “includes” suggests extensive definition. Other directors may be included in the category of the whole time director.

Question 23.
Write short notes on the following in understanding definitions while interpreting statutes:
(i) Ambiguous definitions
(ii) Definitions subject to a contrary context [MTP-April 22]
Answer:
(i) Ambiguous definitions:
Sometime, we may find that the definition section may itself be ambiguous, and so it may have to be interpreted in the light of the other provisions of the Act and having regard to the ordinary meaning of the word defined. Such type of definition is not to be read in isolation.

It must be read in the context of the phrase which it defines, realising that the function of a definition is to give accuracy and certainty to a word or phrase which would otherwise be vague and uncertain but not to contradict it or depose it altogether.

(ii) Definitions subject to a contrary context:
When a word is defined to bear a number of inclusive meanings, the sense in which the word is used in a particular provision must be ascertained from the context of the scheme of the Act, the language of the provision and the object intended to be served thereby.

Question 24.
When can the Preamble be used as an aid to interpretation of a statute? [RTP-May 22]
Answer:
Use of Preamble:

The Preamble expresses the scope, object and purpose of the Act more comprehensively than the Long Title. The preamble may recite the ground and the cause for making a statute and or the evil which is sought to the remedied by it.
While the Preamble can be used to know the aims and objects of the legislation it cannot be used to
control or qualify the precise and unambiguous language of an enactment.
The preamble merely affords help in the matter of construction if there is any ambiguity. Where the language of the Act is clear, the court is bound to give it effect.

Situations in which courts refer to the preamble as an aid to construction:
Situation 1: Where there is any ambiguity in the words of an enactment the assistance of the preamble may be taken to resolve the conflict.

Situation 2: Where the words of an enactment appear to be too general in scope or application then courts may resort to the preamble to determine the scope or limited application for which the words are meant.

Question 25.
Does an explanation added to a section widen the ambit of a section? [May 22 (3 Marks)]
Answer:
Explanation:
Sometimes an explanation is added to a section of an Act for the purpose of explaining the main provisions contained in that section. If there is some ambiguity in the provisions of the main section, the explanation is inserted to harmonise and clear up and ambiguity in the main section.

Something may be added to or something may be excluded from the main provision by insertion of an explanation. But the explanation should not be construed to widen the ambit of the section.

Question 26.
What is the effect of proviso? Does it qualify the main provisions of an Enactment? [May 22 (3 Marks)]
Answer:
Effect of Proviso:

Normally a Proviso is added to a section of an Act to except something or qualify something stated in that particular section to which it is added.
A proviso should not be, ordinarily, interpreted as a general rule. A proviso to a particular section carves out an exception to the main provision to which it has been enacted as a Proviso and to no other provision. [Ram Narian Sons Ltd. Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax]

External Aids to Interpretalion/Construction

Question 27.
At the time of interpreting a statutes what will be the effect of ‘Usage’ or ‘customs and Practices’? [Nov 19 (3 Marks), MTP-Oct. 20, RTP-May 21]
Answer:
Effect of usage:
Usage or practice developed under the statute is indicative of the meaning recognized to its words by contemporary opinion. A uniform notorious practice continued under an old statute and inaction of the Legislature to amend the same are important factors to show that the practice so followed was based on correct understanding of the law. When the usage or practice receives judicial or legislative approval it gains additional weight.

In this connection, we have to bear in mind two Latin maxims:

‘Optima Legum interpres est consuetude’ (the custom is the best interpreter of the law); and
‘Contemporanea exposito est optima etfortissinia in lege’ (the best way to interpret a document is to read it as it would have been read when made).

Therefore, the best interpretation/construction of a statute or any other document is that which has been made by the contemporary authority. Simply stated, old statutes and documents should be interpreted as they would have been at the time when they were enacted/written.

Contemporary official statements throwing light on the construction of a statute and statutory instruments made under it have been used as contemporanea exposition to interpret not only ancient but even recent statutes in India.

Question 28.
Explain how ‘Dictionary Definitions’ can be of great help in interpreting/constructing an Act when the statute is ambiguous. [Nov. 18 (2 Marks); MTP-Oct 18, April 19, Oct 19]
Answer:
Dictionary Definitions:
Where a word is not defined in the Act itself, dictionaries may be referred to find out the general sense in which that word is commonly understood. However, in selecting one out of the several meanings of a word, a person must always take into consideration the context in which it is used in the Act.

It is the fundamental rule that the meanings of words and expressions used in an Act must take their colour from the context in which they appear. Further, judicial decisions laying down the meaning of words in construing statutes in ‘pari materia’ will have greater weight than the meaning furnished by dictionaries. However, for technical terms reference may be made to technical dictionaries.

Question 29.
Explain whether Foreign Decisions be used for construing Indian Acts. [RTP-Nov. 19]
Or
Whether Foreign decisions can be used for construing Indian Statute? Explain. [July 21(3 Marks)]
Answer:
Use of Foreign Decisions:
Foreign decisions of countries following the same system of jurisprudence as ours and given on laws similar to ours can be legitimately used for construing our own Acts. However, prime importance is always to be given to the language of the Indian statute. Further, where guidance can be obtained from Indian decisions, reference to foreign decisions may become unnecessary.

Question 30.
What is External Aid to interpretation? Explain how the Dictionary definitions are the External Aids to Interpretations? [Jan. 21(3 Marks)]
Answer:
External Aid to interpretation:
External aids are the factors that help in interpreting/construing an Act and have been given the convenient nomenclature of ‘External Aids to Interpretation’. Apart from the statute itself there are many matters which may be taken into account when the statute is ambiguous. These matters are called external aids.

Dictionary Definitions:
Where a word is not defined in the Act itself, dictionaries may be referred to find out the general sense in which that word is commonly understood. However, in selecting one out of the several meanings of a word, a person must always take into consideration the context in which it is used in the Act.

Question 31.
In what way are the following terms considered as external aid in the interpretation of statutes:
(i) Historical Setting
(ii) Use of Foreign Decisions [Dec. 21 (3 Marks)]
Answer:
(i) Historical Settings:
The history of the external circumstances which led to the enactment in question is of much significance in construing any enactment. History in general and Parliamentary History in particular, ancient statutes, contemporary or other authentic works and writings all are relevant in interpreting and construing an Act.

(ii) Use of Foreign Decisions:
Foreign decisions of countries following the same system of jurisprudence as ours and given on laws similar to ours can be legitimately used for construing our own Acts. However, prime importance is always to be given to the language of the Indian statute. Further, where guidance can be obtained from Indian decisions, reference to foreign decisions may become unnecessary.

Rules of Interpretation/ Construction of Deeds and Documents

Question 32.
Gaurav Textile Company Limited has entered into a contract with a Company. You are invited to read and interpret the document of contract What rules of interpretation of deeds and documents would you apply while doing so? [MTP-April 22]
Answer:
Rules of interpretation of deeds
The rules regarding interpretation of deeds and documents are as follows:
First and the foremost point that has to be borne in mind is that one has to find out what reasonable man, who has taken care to inform himself of the surrounding circumstances of a deed or a document, and of its scope and intendments, would understand by the words used in that deed or document.

It is inexpedient to construe the terms of one deed by reference to the terms of another.

Further, it is well established that the same word cannot have two different meanings in the same documents, unless the context compels the adoption of such a rule.

The Golden Rule is to ascertain the intention of the parties of the instrument after considering all the words in the documents/deed concerned in their ordinary, natural sense. For this purpose, the relevant portions of the document have to be considered as a whole. The circumstances in which the particular words have been used have also to be taken into account.

Very often, the status and training of the parties using the words have also to be taken into account as the same words may be used by a ordinary person in one sense and by a trained person or a specialist in quite another sense and a special sense. It has also to be considered that very many words are used in more than one sense.

It may happen that the same word understood in one sense will give effect to all the clauses in the deed while taken in another sense might render one or more of the clauses ineffective. In such a case the word should be understood in the former and not in the latter sense.

It may also happen that there is a conflict between two or more clauses of the same documents. An effect must be made to resolve the conflict by interpreting the clauses so that all the clauses are given effect. If, however, it is not possible to give effect of all of them, then it is the earlier clause that will override the latter one.

Interpretation of Statutes – CA Inter Law Study Material

Leave a Comment Cancel Reply