Interpretation of statute
Rule of Noscitur-A-Sociis
(i) Scope of the Rule----A rule of construction, "noscitur-a-sociis," as explained as Lord Macmillan (M.K. Ranganathan v/s Government of Madras AIR 1955 SC 604) means: the meaning of a word is to be judged by the company it keeps. As stated by the Privy Council "It is a legitimate rule of construction to construe words in an Act of Parliament with reference to words found in immediate connection with them." (State of Bombay v. Hospital Mazdoor Sabha AIR 1960 SC 610) It is a rule wider than Ejusdenm generis; rather the latter rule is only an application of the former. The rule noscitur-a-sociis, has been lucidly explained by Gajendrgarkar J., in the following words: "This rule according to Maxwell,(Maxwell, Interpretation of statutes 11th Edition, P.321 ) when two or more words which are susceptible of analogous meaning are coupled together they are understandable to be used in their cognate sense, they take as it were their colour from each other, that is, the more general is restricted to a less general or particular having a certain meaning. Associated words take their colour or meaning from one another if the context of the statute so suggested." In state of Bombay v. Hospital Mazdoor Sabha, AIR 1960 SC 610 the Supreme Court said the basic scope and applicability of noscitur a- sociis rule is that associated words take their meaning from one another under doctrine of noscitur-a-Sociis the philosophy of which is that the meaning of doubtful word may be ascertained by reference to the meaning of words associated with it. Now, this doctrine is merely a rule of construction and it can not 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. It is only where the intention of the Legislature in associating wider words with words of narrower significance is doubtful or otherwise not clear that the present rule of construction can be usefully applied. It can also apply itself where the meaning of the words of wider import is doubtful. But where the object of the Legislature in using wider words is clear and free of ambiguity this rule of construction can't be pressed into service. (G.P. Singh Principle of Statutory Interpretation, 5th Edn., 1992, P. 277)
(ii) Applicability- The true meaning of a section must be gathered from the expressed intention of the legislature. If the words of a statute are in themselves precise and unambiguous no more is necessary than to expound those words in their natural and ordinary sense. The words themselves in such case best declare the intention of the Legislature. (Corporation of city of Nagpur v. Employees AIR 1960 SC 675)
If the words of a statute are precise and unambiguous, they must be accepted as declaring the express intentions of the Legislature. In M.K. Ranganathan v. Government of Madras (AIR 1955 SC 604), Scales v. Pivkering, 130 All E R 840 the Supreme Court held: it is legitimate rule of construction to construe words in an Act of Parliament with reference to words found in immediate connection with them when two or more words are associated they must take their meaning from the words immediate in connection with each other. The general word which follows a particular must be read in the context the particular word is used in the statute. (American Cyamid Company v.Upjohn Co., (1970)3 All E R 785 (HL)
Due to rusting, very little remains of early ironwork.From the medieval period, use of ironwork for decorative purposes became more common. Iron was used to protect doors and windows of Human translation valuable places from attack from raiders and was also used for decoration as can be seen at Canterbury Cathedral,
ReplyDelete