Statutory Construction-Justice Logan

In relation to statutory construction, our position might be contrasted with that of the State and Territory Supreme Courts. The difference is only one of degree for, in modern times, State Parliaments have displayed a like penchant to their Federal counterpart. But the position remains, albeit much eroded by the loss of subjects of jurisdiction to Commonwealth courts and tribunals and by statutory intrusions, that these are courts of general jurisdiction.

Language used by the Legislature is true depository of legislative intent-SC

Rule of interpretation that the language used by the Legislature is the true depository of the legislative intent, and that words and phrases occurring in a statute are to be taken not in an isolated or detached manner dissociated from the context, but are to be read together and construed in the light of the purpose and object of the Act itself.

Difference between obiter dicta and ratio decidendi

State of Haryana Vs Ranbir alias Rana-An obiter dictum as distinguished from ratio decidendi is an observation of the court on a legal question suggested in a case before it but not arising in such manner as to require a decision. Such an obiter may not have binding precedent but it cannot be denied that it is of considerable weight

Heading in statute- purpose

The headings of a portion of a statute may be referred to in order to determine the sense of any doubtful expressions in sections ranged under it. (Hammersmith and City Railway Co. v. Brand, L.R. 4 H.L. 171, 203; but see—per Lord Cairns, id. p. 217. Eastern Counties Rail. Co. v. Marriage, 9 H.L. Ca. 32. Union Steamship Co. of N.Z. v. Melbourne Harbour Trust, 9 App. Ca. 365.)

Sympathy: while construing a statute

While construing a statute, 'sympathy' has no role to play. Supreme Court cannot interpret the provisions of the said Act ignoring the binding decisions of the Constitution Bench of this Court only by way of sympathy to the concerned workmen.