When language of the provision is plain and unambiguous, the question of supplying ‘casus omissus’ does not arise

Apex Court in the case of Union of India and Anr. v. Shardindu held that when language of the provision is plain and unambiguous, the question of supplying ‘casus omissus’ does not arise and the Court can interpret a law but cannot legislate. Therefore, recent trend for supplying gape in legislation is concerned, the Court will be loath in exercise of power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
Read More When language of the provision is plain and unambiguous, the question of supplying ‘casus omissus’ does not arise

The duty to act Judicially may be inferred from the provisions of the statute

It is clear therefore that S. 56 (2) deals with cases where there is a doubt in the mind of the collector in regard to an instrument which comes up before him under the above provisions of the Act as to the construction of the instrument and the provisions of the Act applicable to it. Such doubt itself shows that the point raised for the Collector’s decision is a difficult point of law and from the very nature of the duty to be performed in such circumstances it appears clear that the Chief Controlling Revenue-authority has to decide the matter Judicially and would thus be a quasi-Judicial tribunal.… Read More The duty to act Judicially may be inferred from the provisions of the statute

In construing penal statutes and taxation statutes, the Court has to apply strict rule of interpretation.

That strict interpretation does not encompass strict­ literalism into its fold. It may be relevant to note that simply juxtaposing ‘strict interpretation’ with ‘literal rule’ would result in ignoring an important aspect that is ‘apparent legislative intent… Read More In construing penal statutes and taxation statutes, the Court has to apply strict rule of interpretation.

Where a statute provides for a thing to be done in a particular manner, then it has to be done in that manner, and in no other manner

It is well settled that where a statute provides for a thing to be done in a particular manner, then it has to be done in that manner, and in no other manner, vide Chandra Kishore Jha vs. Mahavir Prasad, AIR 1999 SC 3558 (para 12), Dhananjaya Reddy vs. State of Karnataka, AIR 2001 SC… Read More Where a statute provides for a thing to be done in a particular manner, then it has to be done in that manner, and in no other manner

Meaning of “Notwithstanding anything contained in the Act.”

It is equivalent to saying that in spite of the provision of the Act or any other Act mentioned in the non obstante clause or any contract or document mentioned the enactment following it will have its full operation or that the provisions embraced in the non obstante clause would not be an impediment for an operation of the enactment. … Read More Meaning of “Notwithstanding anything contained in the Act.”