CENTRAL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH BIHAR

PROJECT-TOPIC

“Interpretation Clause: Use and Significance in

Interpretation”

Submitted To Course Submitted By Student

Instructor

Kumar Vaibhav
Prof. S.P. Srivastava
B.A. LLB.(H)
School Of Law And
Sec- B
Governance
4th Semester
Subject- Interpretation of
Enrollment No.
Statutes and Principle of
CUSB1813125050
legislations.
 Acknowledgement
At this point of time I would like to express my gratitude to all those who gave me their
support to complete this project.
I am grateful to my Interpretation of statute Law Teacher Prof. S.P.Srivastava, for giving me
an opportunity to commence this project in the first instance and to do necessary study and
research. I want to thank law faculty members and other faculty members for all their
professional advice, value added time, effort and enterprise help, support, interest and
valuable hints that encouraged me to go ahead with my project.
My heartfelt appreciation also goes to seniors and my classmate for their stimulating
suggestions and encouragement which helped me at each level of my research and in writing
of this project.
Especially, I would like to give my special thanks to my parents, family members and god
whose patient love enabled me to complete this project.
 Table of Contents

1. Introduction……………………………………………………….pg.4
2. ‘Interpretation clause is a novelty’………………………………..pg.5
3. Benefits of the interpretation clause…………………………….pg.5-6
4. Definition clause contains different types of definitions………..pg.6-9
5. Definitions subject to contrary extent………………………....pg.10-11
6. Conclusion………………………………………………………..pg.12
7. Bibliography……………………………………………………...pg.13

INTRODUCTION
Definition or interpretation clauses are generally included in a statute with the purpose of
extending the natural meaning of some words as per the definition given or to interpret such
words, the meanings of which are not clear, by assigning them the meaning given in the
definition clause. Generally, the meaning given to a particular word in the interpretation
clause will be given to that word wherever it is used in that statute. The only exception to this
rule is that if the court feels that in the context of a particular provision the definition clause,
if applied will result in an absurdity, the court will not apply the definition clause, if applied
will result an absurdity, the court will not apply the definition clause while interpreting that
provision. Similarly, the definition clauses of one act cannot be used to explain the same
word used in another statute. However, if both the statutes are in pari materia and the word
has been defined in one act, the same meaning may be assigned to the word in the other act
also.
Definition may be borrowed from an earlier act. This is known as a definition borrowed by
incorporation or by reference, Ichchapur industrial cooperative society limited Vs ONGC,
19971. When the definition of a word is provided in the statute itself, dictionary meaning
cannot be looked into, S. Gopal Reddy Vs State of Andhra Pradesh, 19962.
A definition clause is not to be taken as substituting one set of words for another or as strictly
defining what the meaning of a term must be under all circumstances, but as merely declaring
what may be comprehended within the term, when the circumstances require that it should be
so comprehended, Raval & Co. Vs K.G. Ramachandran, 19743.

Interpretation clause is a Novelty

1
AIR 1997 2 SCC 42
2
AIR 1996 SCC (cri.) 792
3
AIR 1974 818 SCR (2) 629
The legislation can lay down legal definition of its own language, if such bodies are
embodied in the code itself, it becomes binding on the courts. When the acts itself provides a
dictionary for the words used, the court must first look into that dictionary for interpretation.
In mayor of Portsmouth v. smith, the court said that the introduction of the interpretation
clause is a novelty4.
There has been both the criticism and the appraisal made in reference to the inclusion of
definition clause in a statute. In mayor of Portsmouth v. Smith 5, the court observed: “the
introduction of interpretation clause is a novelty”. When the act itself provides the dictionary
for the words used, the court must look into that dictionary for interpretation. And then there
has been criticism made as to the utility of definition clause or the interpretation clause.
Despite this, there has been an inclusion of definition clause in most of the statutes so created,
whether in the Indian statutes or the statutes abroad.

Benefits that arise by adding meaning to the frequent and

important words of a statute

 It provides some kind of certainty and idea as to what extent is the meaning of the
phrase or the word so defined, can be taken. Without having any definition to a word,
it becomes ambiguous as to what the statute or the legislature had the intention of the
word so added.

 When a word has been defined in a statute, it saves the same word to be defined
everywhere in a statute, since the word so defined are frequently used. It is a great
help to those reading and making in use the statutes.

 By adding definition to a word, it is helpful as one can easily understand as to what

the statute is intended to say. A statute thus may well provide with the definition of a
word which suits the legislation and can differ with the general meaning of the word
and yet still stand authoritative.

 There are different meanings to a word when used as different dictionaries provide
with quite different meanings, hindering the interpretation of a word and, thus the
provision in a statute. Providing with a definition in the statute itself makes a lot
easier to understand of what the word in the statute really means and would help
interpret further

4
https://cite.case.law/kan/74/223
5
AIR 1906 "74 Kan. 223, 86 P. 462"
 On if need be, thus eliminating the ambiguity as to the meaning of a word or phrase in
a statute.

As to the cons of adding meaning or definition to a word in legislation, there has been
criticism made on it6.
On drawing a balance between them while comparing both the pros and cons of adding a
definition clause to a statute, it seems the pros have a higher persuasive value of adding
meaning to a statute than of the cons on it.

Definition clause contains different types of definitions

The object of a definition is to avoid the necessity of frequent repetitions in describing the
subject matter to which the word or expression defined is intended to apply. Definitions
contained in the definition clause of a particular statute should be used for the purpose of that
act. Definition from any other statute cannot be borrowed and used ignoring the definition
contained in the statute itself.
RESTRICTIVE DEFINITION
A restrictive definition means that the meaning so defined in the statute for a particular word
has a very restrictive ambit, so much so that its meaning cannot go beyond what has been
defined. There is nothing that can be included in the meaning beyond what has been stated.
There is seldom any scope for interpretation in case of a restrictive definition.
Where ‘means’ is employed, it shows that the definition enacted is hard and fast and that no
other meaning can be assigned to the word “defined” that is put down in the definition.
There is a rationale behind the strict and restrictive interpretation of the word. A few
examples of this are:
Capital punishment: In England, there were tons of capital offenses. Interpretation of a
statute means the difference between life and death for the accused. Court wary of hanging
people. Today, though capital punishment, not a big issues, still concerned not just with
deprivation of liberty, but also with the stigma associated with a criminal offense.

Individualism: Movement from the perspective of individualism to collective interests have

a greater sense of community interests today, thus perhaps attenuating presumption in favour
of private property rights.
When in the definition clause given in any statute the word “means” is used, what follows is
intended to speak exhaustively. When the word “means” is used in the definition it is “hard-
and-fast” definition and no meaning other than that which is put in the definition can be
assigned to the same.

6
https://www.lawctopus.com/academike/interpretation-statutes
EXTENSIVE DEFINITION
When the word defined contains ‘include’ in the meaning, the definition is extensive in
nature.
In case of an extensive definition, the definition of the word has the scope and ambit to go
beyond what has been stated and it also gives the scope to interpret and incorporate as to
what all can be included in that definition.
If a word is to mean one thing and include other things as well, then it does not mean that the
former thing will also be included in the meaning along with the latter things.
The word ‘include’ is very generally used in the interpretation clause in order to enlarge the
meaning of words or phrases must be construed as comprehending, not only such things, as
they signify according to their natural import, but also those things which the interpretation
clause declares that they shall include.
In State of Maharashtra v. Labour Law Practitioner’s Association 7, the court gave the
word ‘district judge’ under article 236(a) of the constitution an extensive definition saying
that the word would include the hierarchy of specialized civil courts viz. Labour courts and
industrial courts which are not expressly include in the definition.
But the word ‘include’ is susceptible of another construction, which may become imperative
if the context of the act is sufficient to show that it was not merely employed for the purpose
of adding the natural significance of the words or expressions used. This may be equivalent to
‘mean and include’ and for the purpose of the act must invariably be attached to those words
or expressions. Thus, the word include may sometimes be used in the context of mean and
would thus limit or bar further inclusion of other things into the meaning of the word or
phrase of the act.
The word ‘include’ may in exceptional cases be construed as equivalent to ‘mean and
include’.
Taking an example of this, Entry 22 of the Minimum Wages Act8, 1948 reads, ‘for the
purpose of this entry potteries include the manufacture of the following articles of pottery
namely.
a) Crockery
b) Sanitary appliances
c) Refractories
d) Jars

e) Electrical accessories
f) Hospital wares
g) Textile accessories
h) Toys
i) Glazed tiles

7
AIR 1998 2 SCC 688
8
https://maitri.mahaonline.gov.in
The Supreme Court in regard to the Entry, in the case of South Gujarat Roofing Tile
Manufacturers Association v. State of Gujarat9, held that the items included in it were
plainly comprised in the expression ‘potteries industry’ which showed that the word
‘included’ was not to extend the normal meaning of this expression. The conclusion was that
the word includes was used in the explanation in the sense of ‘means’ and the definition
provided by the explanation was exhaustive.
A definition section may also be written as ‘is deemed to include’ which again is an inclusive
or extensive definition and such a form is used to bring in by a legal fiction something within
the word defined which according to its ordinary meaning is not included within it.
Wherein a definition by way of amendment replace mean by include, it is construed to give a
wider meaning and perspective to the definition and that the earlier definition which was
limited and restricted to the meaning so defined and to such things defined would no longer
be applicable.
EXHAUSTIVE DEFINITION
A definition using ‘mean and include’ is considered as exhaustive. This means that the
definition will embrace only what is compared within the ordinary meaning of the ‘means’,
together with what is mentioned in the ‘includes’ part of the definition.
Thus, a definition may both mean and includes wherein one thing would mean such things
and others would include things more than what is stated 10. Thus, it can include and exclude
both in the sense that at one place in the definition it can include things and at the other place
of the same definition it can exclude other things to be incorporated.
The definition of ‘transfer of property’ in the Gift Tax act11, 1958 came into jeopardy as the
words ‘disposition, conveyance, assignment, settlement, delivery and payment’ were used in
the definition which signifies different modes of transfer of property. Here it was construed
that the partition of a Hindu undivided family would not be included in this definition as the
meaning cannot be extended to a transfer of property where there is not tax applied.

AMBIGUOUS DEFINITIONS
There are definitions that are ambiguous in itself. This happens when the definition itself is
not clear as to its scope and meaning and there requires further interpretation of those words
or phrases in order to understand or make it applicable to a certain case. It is presumed that
the definitions given by the legislature in the statute will have an effect to the extent that there
might not be any requirement to interpret the word further on and that the meaning so
provided would be sufficient in itself, yet, there are definitions that the legislature makes
which are ambiguous and require further interpretation.
Sir George Rankin in the case of ILM Cadija Umma v. S. Don Manis Appu 12, said, “A
phrase having been introduced and then defined, the definition prima facie must entirely
9
AIR 1977 90 SCR (1) 878
10
https://www.lawctopus.com/academike/interpretation-statutes
11
http://www.rfhha.org
12
AIR 1939 Privy Council 63
determine the application of the phrase, but the definition must itself be interpreted before it
is applied, and interpreted, in case of doubt in a sense appropriate to the phrase defined and to
the general purpose of the enactment”.
The use of the word “means” followed by the word “includes” in the definition of “banking
company” in section 2(b) of the ID Act 13 is clearly indicative of the legislative intent to make
the definition exhaustive and would cover only those banking companies which fall within
the purview of the definition and no other.
The definition may itself be ambiguous and may have to be interpreted in the light of the
other provisions of the act and having regard to the ordinary connotation of the word defined.
A definition is not to be read in isolation.
It must be read in the context of the phrase which it defines, realizing that the function of a
definition is to give precision and certainty to a word or phrase which would otherwise be
vague and uncertain but not to contradict it or supplant it altogether. Thus, in case a definition
clause is ambiguous and does not provide with a sufficient meaning, there requires
interpretation for the word in the sense that it should apply to the case.
Also, in order to understand in complete the meaning of the word, it should not be read in
isolation and should require taking help of other provisions or the definition for the same
word provided in different statutes. This, in turn, provides rather a specific and precise
meaning to the word so defined in ambiguity and helps in understanding applying it to the
relevant situation and to situation wherever necessary.

DEFINITIONS SUBJECT TO CONTRARY EXTENT

In context to the definitions of this kind, lord Dunedin said, “It is a novel and unheard of the
idea that an interpretation clause which might easily so expressed as to cover certain sections
and not cover others should be when expressed in general terms divided up by sort of theory
applicana singular singulis, so as not to apply to the sections where context suggests no
difficulty of application.

13
https://indiankanoon.org
If the legislature defines a term, in the absence of a clear indication to the contrary, those
terms shall be used as proposed. But where there is a context otherwise required, the terms or
the words shall be given a meaning different from that defined in the statute and thus comes
into play the part of the interpretation.
The definitions many times contains phrases like ‘unless the context otherwise requires’ or
‘unless there is anything repugnant in the subject or context’ 14. In these situations, a contrary
context may be used for the purpose of the situation in the case. And even if it has not been
expressly stated in the definition, it is imperative to make the interpretation of the words so
used if so required.
An argument based on contrary context which will make the inclusive definition inapplicable
to any provision in the act cannot be accepted as it would make the definition entirely useless.
When the application of the definition of a term in a provision containing that the term makes
it unworkable and otiose, it can be said that the definition is not applicable to that provision
because of the contrary context.
While finding the meaning of the word ‘insurer’ in various sections of the act (Insurance Act,
1938), the meaning to be ordinarily given to it is that given in the definition clause. But this is
flexible and there may be sections in the act where the meaning may have to be departed
from on account of the subject or context in which the word had been used and that will give
effect to the opening sentence of the definition.
The definition of the word shall also be amended if there is a change made in the provisions
of the constitution and the act and both do not cohere with each other due to the definition. If
there is an amendment made in the constitution or act or both due to which some provisions
do not have conformity with each other which include the usage of the meanings of the words
which remain unamend, the words so defined are useless and redundant.
Taking an example of the definitions of the contrary extent, in construing the word ‘court’ in
section 14(2) of the arbitration act, 1940, it was held that the word court as used therein
meant a court which appointed the arbitrator and the definition in section 2(c) of the act
which defines court as meaning a court which would entertain suit on the subject matter does
not govern section 14(2) as the context made that definition inapplicable.
Similarly in construing the word ‘workmen’ in section 33- C (2) of the Industrial Disputes
act, 1947, it was held that the word included a dismissed workman although, in the definition
of

that word as given in section 2, a dismissed workman is included only for the purpose of
industrial disputes in section 10.
The court not only has to look at the words but the context, the collocation and the object in
order to interpret the meaning to relate the matter.

14
https://www.lawctopus.com
 CONCLUSION
The Definition clause so added in an act provides with a lot of help in determining the
meaning of a word in a statute. Whereas it becomes cumbersome to find the correct
contention of a word used in a statute, the inclusion of definition or interpretation clause
becomes helpful by providing the required context or meaning of the word so used in a
statute, either once, or several times.
The definition clause has been classified into three kinds of definitions, with respect to the
scope and ambit and the usage of the word. They are Restrictive definitions, which are hard
and fast and are to be taken in strict sense as to what has been stated in the definition of a
word. Extensive Definition, which provides with the scope of interpretation of a meeting
more than what is required and the Exhaustive Definition, which contains both means and
includes, wherein one part may mean something while the other would include something
into the definition making is exhaustive in nature.
The other category is where there is another context required to a definition, usually stated in
the definitions as ‘unless the context otherwise requires’, wherein the definition needs to have
a different contention of the word for which there requires an interpretation in the sense that it
is applied to a specific case. But where is no such meaning applied, usually in case where the
statutes and the constitution are amended and the definitions of words used therein are not
amended, it renders those words completely useless as the words they cannot be applied to
the provisions since they are not in consonance with other provisions or the constitution.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

BOOKS REFERRED:
 Bhattacharyya T, “The Interpretation of Statutes”; Central Law Agency 10th ed., 2017
  Singh Avtar & Kaur Harpreet, “Introduction to Interpretation of Statutes”;
LexisNexis; 4th ed., 2016
 Srivastava R. D, “Interpretation of Statutes and Legislation”, Central Law
Publication; 2nd ed., 2013

WEBSITES REFERRED:
 www.lawctopus.com
 www.scconline.co.in
 https://www.lawteacher.net/free-law-essays
 www.sweetandmaxwell.co.uk
 https://indiankanoon.org
 http://www.rfhha.org
 https://maitri.mahaonline.gov.in