Interpretation means the art of finding out the true sense of an enactment by giving the words of the enactment their natural and ordinary meaning. It is the process of ascertaining the true meaning of the words used in a statute. The Court is not expected to interpret arbitrarily and therefore there have been certain principles which have evolved out of the continuous exercise by the Courts. These principles are sometimes called ‘rules of interpretation'. The object of interpretation of statutes is to determine the intention of the legislature conveyed expressly or impliedly in the language used. As stated by SALMOND, "by interpretation or construction is meant, the process by which the courts seek to ascertain the meaning of the legislature through the medium of authoritative forms in which it is expressed."
What we speak or write are the means of communication. No problem arises when the words areof single meaning, but those with plural meanings require the basic intend of the conveyor to be understood. If two people conversing with each other, surely whatever be the uncertainty in thelanguage will be resorted at the same time. Let us suppose we discovered a letter written by asoldier during World War I, to his wife, there will definitely be some words inconsistent with the others and will be delivering more than one meaning. The best way to understand the real meaning is to have a logical interpretation of his mind and the conditions that affected his writingof the letter which will deliver the real intend of the writer. All that we can do is to solve themystery by our self as the soldier is not there to make us understand the whole meaning of theletter; the same is the case with our judiciary as they by their own intellect have to interpret the statutes made by the legislators. In most circumstances the language of the statute has a plain,simple and to the point meaning. Interpretation becomes more important when it comes touncertain and repugnant provisions of the statues.
The reason for ambiguity of legislation is the basic nature of language. It is not always possible to accurately convert the real intend of the legislation into written words. The versatility of language inevitably means that there will often be equally good or equally unconvincing arguments for two competing interpretation. There are at times the provisions having more than one meaning or the ambiguity in the language. The legislature becomes functus officio after enacting the statues. The interpreters cannot go back to the legislature and ask for the exact meaning of the statute as the legislators would not have assumed such a wide variety of conditions while making of any particular statute.
Thus it is totally on the Judges to interpret such provisions so that both are effective. To avoid further ambiguities legislation has provided us with the primary rules of interpretations. Here only two of the rules will be discussed and a reasonable comparison shall be drawn out between them. Harmonious Construction and Beneficial Construction are the two rules to be discussed as a concept and shall be compared with each other as per usages of the same and on different heads.
Interpretation And Construction
Interpretation is the method by which true sense or the meaning of the word is understood. The meaning of an ordinary meaning of an English word is not a question of law. According to Gray , the process by which a judge constructs from the words of a statute book, a meaning which he either believes to be that of the legislature, or which, he proposes to attribute to it is interpretation. Salmond describes interpretation as the process which the courts seek to ascertain the meaning of the legislature through the medium of authoritative forms in which it is expressed.
What we speak or write are the means of communication. No problem arises when the words areof single meaning, but those with plural meanings require the basic intend of the conveyor to be understood. If two people conversing with each other, surely whatever be the uncertainty in thelanguage will be resorted at the same time. Let us suppose we discovered a letter written by asoldier during World War I, to his wife, there will definitely be some words inconsistent with the others and will be delivering more than one meaning. The best way to understand the real meaning is to have a logical interpretation of his mind and the conditions that affected his writingof the letter which will deliver the real intend of the writer. All that we can do is to solve themystery by our self as the soldier is not there to make us understand the whole meaning of theletter; the same is the case with our judiciary as they by their own intellect have to interpret the statutes made by the legislators. In most circumstances the language of the statute has a plain,simple and to the point meaning. Interpretation becomes more important when it comes touncertain and repugnant provisions of the statues.
The reason for ambiguity of legislation is the basic nature of language. It is not always possible to accurately convert the real intend of the legislation into written words. The versatility of language inevitably means that there will often be equally good or equally unconvincing arguments for two competing interpretation. There are at times the provisions having more than one meaning or the ambiguity in the language. The legislature becomes functus officio after enacting the statues. The interpreters cannot go back to the legislature and ask for the exact meaning of the statute as the legislators would not have assumed such a wide variety of conditions while making of any particular statute.
Thus it is totally on the Judges to interpret such provisions so that both are effective. To avoid further ambiguities legislation has provided us with the primary rules of interpretations. Here only two of the rules will be discussed and a reasonable comparison shall be drawn out between them. Harmonious Construction and Beneficial Construction are the two rules to be discussed as a concept and shall be compared with each other as per usages of the same and on different heads.
Interpretation And Construction
Interpretation is the method by which true sense or the meaning of the word is understood. The meaning of an ordinary meaning of an English word is not a question of law. According to Gray , the process by which a judge constructs from the words of a statute book, a meaning which he either believes to be that of the legislature, or which, he proposes to attribute to it is interpretation. Salmond describes interpretation as the process which the courts seek to ascertain the meaning of the legislature through the medium of authoritative forms in which it is expressed.
Rule of Harmonious Construction
When there is a conflict between two or more statues or two or more parts of a statute then the rule of harmonious construction needs to be adopted. The rule follows a very simple premise that every statute has a purpose and intent as per law and should be read as a whole. The interpretation consistent of all the provisions of the statute shouldbe adopted. In the case in which it shall be impossible to harmonize both the provisions,the court’s decision regarding the provision shall prevail.The rule of harmonious construction is the thumb rule to interpretation of any statute. An interpretation which makes the enactment a consistent whole, should be the aim of the Courts and a construction which avoids inconsistency or repugnancy between the various sections or parts of the statute should be adopted. The Courts should avoid “ahead on clash”, in the words of the Apex Court, between the different parts of an enactment and conflict between the various provisions should be sought to be harmonized. The normal presumption should be consistency and it should not be assumed that what is given with one hand by the legislature is sought to be taken away by the other. The rule of harmonious construction has been tersely explained by the Supreme Court thus, “When there are, in an enactment two provisions which cannot be reconciled with each other, they should be so interpreted, that if possible, effect shouldbe given to both”. A construction which makes one portion of the enactment a dead letter should be avoided since harmonization is not equivalent to destruction.
Harmonious Construction should be applied to statutory rules and courts should avoid absurd or unintended results. It should be resorted to making the provision meaningful in the context. It should be in consonance with the intention of Rule makers. Rule of Harmonious construction is applicable to subordinate legislature also.
The Supreme Court laid down five principles of rule of Harmonious Construction in the landmark case of CIT v Hindustan Bulk Carriers :
1. The courts must avoid a head on clash of seemingly contradicting provisions and they must construe the contradictory provisions so as to harmonize them.
2. The provision of one section cannot be used to defeat the provision contained in another unless the court, despite all its effort, is unable to find a way to reconcile their differences.
3. When it is impossible to completely reconcile the differences in contradictory provisions, the courts must interpret them in such as way so that effect is given to both the provisions as much as possible.
4. Courts must also keep in mind that interpretation that reduces one provision to a useless number or dead is not harmonious construction.
To harmonize is not to destroy any statutory provision or to render it fruitless.
EmoticonEmoticon