INTERPRETATION OF
STATUTES
MCQs
The Rule in Heydon’s case is also known as—
a) Purposive construction
b) Mischief Rule
c) Golden Rule
d) Exceptional Construction
b) Mischief Rule
Pick the odd one out of the following aids to interpretation—
a) Preamble
b) Marginal Notes
c) Proviso
d) Usage
d) Usage
is the cardinal rule of construction that words, sentences
and phrases of a statute should be read in their ordinary, natural and
grammatical meaning so that they may have effect in their widest
amplitude.
a) Rule of Literal Construction
b) Rule of Harmonious Construction
c) Rule of Beneficial Construction
d) Rule of Exceptional Construction
a)Rule of Literal Construction
An internal aid that may be added to include something within the
section or to exclude something from it, is—
a) Proviso
b) Explanation
c) Schedule
d) Illustrations
b) Explanation
When there is a conflict between two or more statues or two or more
parts of a statute then which rule is applicable:
a) Welfare construction
b) Strict construction
c) Harmonious construction
d) Mischief Rule
c) Harmonious Construction
Descriptive Questions
Q. Explain the rule in ‘Heydon’s Case’ while interpreting the
Statutes quoting an example.
A. 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 the Heydon’s case. This rule
enables, consideration of four matters in constituting an Act:
what was the law before making of the Act,
what was the mischief or defect for which the law did not provide,
what is the remedy that the Act has provided, and
what is the reason for the remedy.
The rule then directs that the courts must adopt that construction which ‘shall suppress the
mischief and advance the remedy’. Therefore, even in a case where the usual meaning of the
language used falls short of the whole object of the legislature, a more extended meaning may
be attributed to the words, provided they are fairly susceptible of it. If the object of any
enactment is public safety, then its working must be interpreted widely to give effect to that
object. Thus, in the case of Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1923 the main object being provision
of compensation to workmen, it was held that the Act ought to be so construed, as far as
possible, so as to give effect to its primary provisions.
However, 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 [CIT v. Sodra Devi (1957) 32 ITR 615 (SC)]
Q. Explain the principles of “Grammatical Interpretation” and
“Logical Interpretation” of a Statute. What are the duties of a
court in this regard?
A. 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.
Q. (i) What is the effect of proviso? Does it qualify the main
provisions of an Enactment?
(ii) Does an explanation added to a section widen the ambit of
a section?
A. (i) 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. v. Commissioner of Sales Tax AIR (1955) S.C. 765]
(ii) 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 added be 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.
Q. 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?
A. 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 maybe used by an 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.
Q. How will you interpret the definitions in a statute, if the
following words are used in a statute?
Means
Includes
Give one illustration for each of the above from Statutes you
are familiar with
A. 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 [section 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 [Section 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.
Q. Differentiate Mandatory Provision from a Directory Provision.
What factors decide whether a provision is directory or
mandatory?
A. 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
Q. Define Grammatical Interpretation. What are the exceptions
to grammatical interpretation?
A. 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.
Q. When can the Preamble be used as an aid to interpretation
of a statute?
A. 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 is the key to the mind of the maker of the law, but it cannot override in order to
enlarge or restrict the enacting provision of the Act. A provision contained in the Act cannot
be considered as invalid because they do not accord with the preamble, which is only a
brief summary of legislative objectives behind the Act, and if there is any conflict between
the preamble and any provision of an Act, the provision prevails.
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.
When will 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
Q. Explain how 'Dictionary Definitions' can be of great help in
interpreting/ constructing an Act when the statute is
ambiguous.
A. Dictionary Definitions: First we refer the Act in question to find out if any particular word
or expression is defined in it. Where we find that a word is not defined in the Act itself, we
may refer to dictionaries 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, we 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
Q. Preamble does not over-ride the plain provision of the Act.
Comment. Also give suitable example
A. 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 over-ride 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 section 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
section 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” [GullipoliSowria Raj v. BandaruPavani, (2009)1
SCC714].
Q. At the time of interpreting a Statute what will be the effect
of ‘Usage’ or ‘customs and Practices’?
A. 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:
1. 'Optima Legum interpres est consuetude' (the custom is the best interpreter of the law);
and
2. ‘Contemporanea Expositio est optima et fortissinia 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 expositio to
interpret not only ancient but even recent statutes in India.
