Vande Matram! Interpretation of Statute is very important skill which every law professional must possess. Hence it is incorporated in the degree course of law. Let’s discuss about how a title can be used to interpret the statute?
Long title and short title:
It is now settled that Long Title of an Act is a part of the Act and is admissible as an aid to its construction. The long title which often precedes the preamble must be distinguished with the short title. The long title is taken along with the preamble or even in its absence is a good guide regarding the object, scope or purpose of the Act. The short title being only an abbreviation for purposes of reference is not a useful aid to construction.
The title although part of the Act is in itself not an enacting provision and though useful in case of ambiguity of the enacting provisions, is ineffective to control their clear meaning. In earlier English cases, it was observed that the title is not a part of the statute. The title of the enactment cannot override the clear meaning of the enactment. Title cannot control the express operative provision of the enactment.
Judgments:
Aswinikumar Ghose v. Arabinda Bose, AIR 1952 SC pp.369,
388
While dealing with the Supreme Court Advocates (Practice in High Courts) Act, 1951, which bears a full title thus ‘An Act to authorise Advocates of the Supreme Court to practise as of right in any High Court, S. R. DAS, J., observed: “One cannot but be impressed at once with the wording of the full title of the Act. Although there are observations in earlier English cases that the title is not a part of the statute and is, therefore, to be excluded from consideration in construing the statutes, it is now settled law that the title of a statute is an important part of the Act and may be referred to for the purpose of ascertaining its general scope and of throwing light on its construction, although it cannot override the clear meaning of the enactment.
Manoharlal v. State of Punjab, AIR 1961 SC pp.418, 419,
The long title of the Act – on which learned counsel placed considerable reliance as a guide for the determination of the scope of the Act and the policy underlying the legislation, no doubt, indicates the main purposes of the enactment but cannot, obviously, control the express operative provisions of the Act.
Amarendra Kumar Mohapatra & Ors. v. State of Orissa
& Ors., (2014) 4 SCC 583
In this case the Supreme Court has held that: “The title of a statute is no doubt an important part of an enactment and can be referred to for determining the general scope of the legislation. But the true nature of any such enactment has always to be determined not on the basis of the title given to it but on the basis of its substance.”
M.P.V. Sundararamier & Co. v. State of A.P., AIR 1958
SC 468
In this case the Supreme Court was considering whether the impugned enactment was a Validation Act in the true sense. This Court held that although the short title as also the marginal note described the Act to be a Validation Act, the substance of the legislation did not answer that description. The Supreme Court observed: “It is argued that to validate is to confirm or ratify, and that can be only in respect of acts which one could have himself performed, and that if Parliament cannot enact a law relating to sales tax, it cannot validate such a law either, and that such a law is accordingly unauthorised and void. They only basis for this contention in the Act is its description in the short title as the ‘Sales Tax Laws Validation Act’ and the marginal note to Section 2, which is similarly worded. But the true nature of a law has to be determined not on the label given to it in the statute but on its substance. Section 2 of the impugned Act which is the only substantive enactment therein makes no mention of any validation. It only provides that no law of a State imposing tax on sales shall be deemed to be invalid merely because such sales are in the course of inter-State trade or commerce. The effect of this provision is merely to liberate the State laws from the fetter placed on then by Article 286(2) and to enable such laws to operate on their own terms.”
Thanks for
reading till the end. Please share this blog.
#InterpretationOfStatutes
#StudyHelp #Notes #LawNotes #GeneralClausesAct #Bharat #India
================
No comments:
Post a Comment