1

MAXIMS

DOCTRINE OF HARMONIOUS CONSTRUCTION

This rule is used to avoid any inconsistency and repugnancy within a section or between a
section and other parts of a statute. 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 which is
consistent with all the provisions and makes the enactment consistent shall prevail. The doctrine
follows a settled rule that an interpretation that results in injustice, hardship, inconvenience, and
anomaly should be avoided. The interpretation with the closest conformity to justice must be
picked.
The Supreme Court laid down 5 main principles of the ‘Doctrine of Harmonious Construction’-

• The courts must avoid a ‘head of clash’ of contradictory provisions and they must construe
the contradictory provisions so as to harmonize them.vi
• When it is not possible to completely reconcile the differences in contradictory provisions,
the court must interpret them in such a way so as to give effect to both provisions as much
as possible.
• Courts must keep in mind that the interpretation which reduces one provision to a useless
standing is against the essence of ‘Harmonious Construction’.
• To harmonize the provisions is not to render them fruitless or destroy any statutory
provision.
• The provision of one section cannot be used to render useless the other provision, unless the
court, despite all its efforts, finds a way to reconcile the differences.
The approach that is mostly used by the courts is to find out which provision is more general in
nature so as to construe the more general provision and exclude the specific one. The
maxims Generalia Specialibus Non-Derogant, and Generalia Specialibus Derogant catches the
essence of the doctrine. The former means that general things do not derogate from special
things, and the latter means that special things derogate from general things.
Further, this principle is also used to resolve conflicts between two separate acts and in the
making of statutory orders and rules. But if a person has two remedies, one being general and the

INNOVATIVE INSTITUTE OF LAW

PLOT NO.-6, KNOWLEDGE PARK-2, GREATER NOIDA
 2

other being specific, they continue to hold good for the concerned person until he elects one of
them.xv
LANDMARK CASE LAWS ON HARMONIOUS CONSTRUCTION
In M.S.M. Sharma v. Krishna Sinha, the doctrine was applied to resolve the conflict between
Articles 19(1)(a) and Article 194(3) of the Constitution and it was held that the right to freedom
of speech as guaranteed under Article 19(1)(a) is to be read as subjects of powers and privileges
of the House of the Legislature which is similar to those of the House of Commons of the United
Kingdom as declared under Article 194(3).
But, after the above judgment, in Special Reference No. 1 of 1964xvii, it was decided that Article
194(3) was subordinate to Articles 21, 32, 211, and 226. This conclusion was also reached
through the recourse of Harmonious Construction.
Furthermore, in the case of Venkataramana Devaru v. the State of Mysorexviii, the Supreme
Court applied the doctrine in resolving a conflict between Articles 25(2)(b) and 26(b) of the
Constitution and it was held that the right of every religious denomination or any section thereof
to manage its own affairs in matters of religion [Article 26(b)] is subject to provisions made by
the State providing for social welfare and reform or opening of Hindu religious institutions of a
public character to all classes and sections of Hindus [Article 25(2)(b)].
The principle of ‘Harmonious Construction’ is also applicable in the case of construction of
provisions relating to subordinate legislation.

In the landmark judgment of Sirsilk Ltd. v. Govt. of Andhra Pradeshxix, a very important
question was answered. Various disputes arose between the employer and the workmen and it
was further referred to an industrial tribunal. After the adjudication was over, the government
sent its award to the government for publication. However, before the publication of the award,
the parties to the dispute came to a settlement, and wrote a letter to the government jointly, that
the dispute has been settled and the award shall not be published. The government refused to
withhold the publication and in turn, the parties further moved the High Court. The High Court
rejected the writ petition. The parties further moved the Supreme Court through a special leave
petition.
The main premise of the appellants was that Section 17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 was
directory in nature and not mandatory.xx

INNOVATIVE INSTITUTE OF LAW

PLOT NO.-6, KNOWLEDGE PARK-2, GREATER NOIDA
 3

Ordinarily, the words ‘shall’ and ‘must’ are mandatory, and the word ‘may’ is a directory,
although using them interchangeably in legislation is common.xxi
Section 17(1) of the Act states, ‘‘Every award shall within a period of thirty days from the date
of its receipt by the appropriate government be published in such manner as the appropriate
government thinks fit.” The court read the Section 17 and 17A and declared that the duty cast on
the government to publish the award is mandatory and not a directory. Thus, the contention of
the appellants did not hold good.

But on further observation by the court, Section 18 was scrutinized. Section 18 (1) provides that
a settlement arrived at by agreement between the employer and the workmen otherwise than in
the course of conciliation proceeding shall be binding on the parties to the agreement.

The Supreme Court observed that in the present case, the duty of the government under Section
17 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 and settlement under Section 18 are in conflict with each
other. Finally, it was held that where a settlement has been arrived at between the parties before
the tribunal after the award has been submitted to the government but before its publication, no
dispute is left to be resolved. So, the government should refrain from publishing the award.xxii
Thus, in the above case, Harmonious Construction was employed. This is a fine example of how
enforcement of one provision can be implemented without rendering the other provision useless
or dead.

HOW TO APPLY THE DOCTRINE OF HARMONIOUS CONSTRUCTION

After analyzing various case laws, the Courts have devised certain steps for the better
applicability of the said doctrine-

• Giving full effect to both the provisions and reducing the contrary nature and/or conflict
between them.
• Both the provisions that are conflicting in nature or are repugnant to each other are to be
read as a whole and the entire enactment in question must be considered.
• Of the two conflicting provisions, choose the one that is wider in scope.
• Compare the wider provision with the narrow provision and then try to interpret the wider
provision to see further consequence. If the consequence is as reasonable as to harmonize

INNOVATIVE INSTITUTE OF LAW

PLOT NO.-6, KNOWLEDGE PARK-2, GREATER NOIDA
 4

both the provisions, and it gives their full effect separately, no further inquiry is needed. One
important aspect to be kept in mind is that the legislature while framing the provisions was
fully aware of the situation which they entered to cover and therefore all provisions enacted
require to be given their full effect on scope.xxiii
• When one section of an Act takes away powers conferred by another Act, a non-obstante
clause must be used.xxiv
• It is imperative that the Court must try to find out the extent to which the legislature has
intended to give one provision an overriding power over another provision. In the case
of Eastbourne Corporation v. Fortes Ltd.xxv, it was held that if two contradictory sessions
cannot be reconciled, then the last section must prevail. Though this is not a universal rule.
IMPORTANCE OF INTERPRETATION OF STATUES
Every court is assigned a task of statutory interpretation and it should be performed with utmost
care and caution. The court can always interpret legislation in its own way and the responsibility
to understand the intent of the legislature while applying the doctrine also stands solely with the
court. The interpretation of different statutes differ in nature and it is imperative that the
interpretation comes out in a clear and unambiguous way. But, if both the provisions are unclear,
there will be no interpretation. They will only interpret when the words are clear and in the case
of any ambiguity the court will look into enacting provisions of the statute. The court here will
only apply the Literal interpretation and apply the popular meaning. Regarding the law, every
word has a meaning and the interpretation will become the scope and beyond the reach of
objectives and reasons for which the statute was enacted in the legislature. Hence, the court
should understand the importance of the ‘Doctrine of Harmonious Construction’ and
interpretation of statutes in general with its ever increasing scope in the present times.

This rule is used when there are two statutes or parts of a statute have a conflict. The
interpretation which is consistent with all the provisions and also is in accordance with the intent
of the legislature will be adopted. A construction which leads to repugnancy should not be used
and the statute should be read as a whole.

Features

1. The goal should be to make the law whole and consistent.

INNOVATIVE INSTITUTE OF LAW

PLOT NO.-6, KNOWLEDGE PARK-2, GREATER NOIDA
 5

2. Two or more statutes can be harmonized by this rule.

3. The provision of one statute cannot defeat the use of the other statute.

4. A construction which reduces one part of the statute to nothing is not considered as
harmonious.

Case Laws

Case Law 1: Raj Krushna Bose vs Binod Kanungo

The court stated in this case that whenever possible, two conflicting provisions should be
constructed in a way that they harmonize.

Case Law 2: T.M.A. Pai Foundation v. State of Karnataka

The Supreme Court interpreted Articles 29 and 30. The court stated that while interpreting
provisions the goal is to achieve full cooperation between laws. The court also stated that:

1. The laws cannot be read in isolation.

2. The rule cannot be used if it renders one of the laws redundant.

Case Law 3: CIT v. Hindustan Bulk Carriers

The court stated the following rules for harmonious construction:

Rule 1- The courts should avoid a conflict between provisions. The provisions should be
interpreted to create harmony.

Rule 2-The provision of one section cannot be used to defect the provision of the other section.
When it is impossible to reconcile the differences between the provisions then they should be
constructed in such a way that effect is given to both the provisions.

INNOVATIVE INSTITUTE OF LAW

PLOT NO.-6, KNOWLEDGE PARK-2, GREATER NOIDA
 6

Rule 3-The courts must keep in mind that if the construction makes the other statute meaningless
or dead then it is not harmonious.

Ejusdem Generis

This phrase literally translates to “of the same kind and of the same species”. According to this
rule, when a specific word is used in the Act and a general word is used afterward, then the
general word will be construed in reference to the specific word.

Case Law: Jage Ram v. State of Haryana

To apply this rule, the following conditions must exist:

1. The statute mentions a number of things one by one by using specific words,
2. The number of things mentioned should constitute a class,
3. There are other things in the class that exists,
4. A general term is used for the things mentioned,
5. There is a distinct genus that comprises of more than one species.

Beneficial Construction

There are some laws which are specifically made for the benefit of some section of people. Some
of these are:

1. Consumer Protection Act

2. The Industrial Disputes Act
3. The Juvenile Justice Act
4. Factories Act
5. And other socio-economic legislations

INNOVATIVE INSTITUTE OF LAW

PLOT NO.-6, KNOWLEDGE PARK-2, GREATER NOIDA
 7

The rule of beneficial construction states that when there are two meanings of the law and one
meaning gives the benefit and other takes it away. The meaning which grants the benefit should
be adopted.

Case Laws

Case Law 1: Hindustan Lever Ltd v Ashok Vishnu Kate

The court stated that when a law is enacted for social welfare. The construction which extends
the intended benefit to the people should be made.

Case Law 2: Noor Saba Khatoon v. Mohammad Quasim

The Supreme Court held in this case that the provision for maintenance under 125 of Civil
Procedure Code and maintenance of children under 2 years are independent of each other and no
legislation which is passed subsequent to it can affect the provisions.

Purposive Construction

This rule interprets law keeping in mind the intent for which it was enacted. In this kind of
interpretation, external aids such as commentaries, parliamentary debates, etc. are used. The
mischief rule is the foundation for this type of construction.

Secondary Rules

In addition to the above-stated rules, there are also other rules for interpreting statutes. These
other rules are expressed in legal maxims. These are,

Expressio Unius Est Exclusio Alterius

INNOVATIVE INSTITUTE OF LAW

PLOT NO.-6, KNOWLEDGE PARK-2, GREATER NOIDA
 8

Expressio Unius Est Exclusio Alterius is a legal maxim which literally translates to the ‘explicit
mention of one thing is the exclusion of another’. When a thing is explicitly mentioned in a
provision of an Act, then all other things are not considered.

Contemporanea Expositio Est Optima Et Fortissima in Lege

This rule of construction states that the best explanation of the law would be to read it as it would
have been read at the time that it was passed. This rule also considers the surrounding
circumstances under which the Act was passed.

Noscitur a Sociis

The meaning of the word is known from its association. It is a rule of construction which states
that the meaning of an unambiguous word or phrase should be considered on the basis of the
context in which it was used.

Aids in Interpretation

In addition to the rules, interpretation can be made by using aids. There are two kinds of aids for
interpreting a statute. These are,

1. Internal Aids
2. External Aids

Internal Aids

Internal aids are aids which are first referred to for interpreting a statute. These are present in the
statute itself and include:

1. Preamble of the Act: It has been decided that while preamble may not be a part of the
Act. It can be referred to know the mischief for which the Act was enacted. The
Supreme Court in Kavalappara Kottarathil Kochuni v. the State Of Madras And

INNOVATIVE INSTITUTE OF LAW

PLOT NO.-6, KNOWLEDGE PARK-2, GREATER NOIDA
 9

Others stated that if an ambiguity arises in the construction of a statute, then the
preamble can be referred.
2. Title of the Act: The title tells about the purpose of the Act in a concise way and often
precedes the preamble of the Act.
3. Heading of the Chapter of the Act: An Act is divided into chapters, these chapters deal
with different things. What kind of things the chapter deals with can be known by
reading the heading of the specific chapter?
4. Marginal Notes in the Act: Supreme Court in Sarabjit Rick Singh vs Union Of
India stated that reference to marginal notes would be permissible only when the main
provision is supposed to be interpreted differently.
5. The Punctuations in the Provisions of the Act: The punctuations play a very important
role in the construction of the provision.
6. The Illustrations that supplements the provisions under the Act: Illustrations are
valuable as long as they indicate the intent of the legislature.
7. Explanations provided of the provision of the Act: Explanations of provisions help in
determining what the provision means.
8. Definitions provided in the Act: Every Act has an interpretation clause which contains
important definitions. These definitions may be inclusive or exhaustive. This clause is
very important for interpreting various words in a statute.

External Aids

External aids are used when internal aids are not sufficient to know the meaning of the statute.
External aids include,

1. Statement of Objects and Reasons of the Bill: When a Bill is passed, its statement of
objects and reasons describe the intent of the legislature.
2. The Commentaries on the Law by various Authors: Commentaries by various authors
are very useful in interpreting a statute.
3. Dictionaries: In literal construction, the dictionary meaning of the words is referred
to.

INNOVATIVE INSTITUTE OF LAW

PLOT NO.-6, KNOWLEDGE PARK-2, GREATER NOIDA
 10

4. The Circumstances Surrounding the Enactment of the Act: In Commissioner of

Income Tax vs. Sodra Devi, the court stated that it was not necessary to refer to any
external aid if the language of the statute is clear and unambiguous.
5. Reference to Reports of Committee: The reference to reports of Select Committee or
Law Commission or any report of any other committee on the basis of which the Act
was enacted can be made to interpret the statute.
6. Reference to other Statutes: Sometimes other statutes are referred for interpreting a
statute.
7. Parliamentary Debates: Before a Bill is passed it is debated in the parliament. The
debates can be referred to know the intent behind a particular provision of the Act.
8. History of the Act: The history of the Act along with the surrounding circumstances
are helpful in determining the meaning of the provisions of the Act.
9. Foreign Decisions: Decisions given by foreign courts can also be used to interpret the
law provided that the country has the same system of jurisprudence as ours. The
surrounding circumstances in which the Act was enacted and the Indian conditions to
which the law applies are considered.
10. Political, Social and Economic Developments: Developments that affect the very
structure of society also help in interpreting a statute.

Conclusion

Thus, the interpretation of statutes is an important process. Moreover, it is essential that the
interpretation is done according to the various rules prescribed. The rules should be followed to
ensure that judges do not arbitrability exercise the responsibility that they are entrusted with.

NOSCITUR A SOCIIS:

Sometimes few words or phrases may have two or more meanings. Choosing of correct meaning
is important for proper implementation. When such kinds of difficulties arise, the words or the
phrase’s meaning is determined by its surrounding words or accompanying words. Maxwell

INNOVATIVE INSTITUTE OF LAW

PLOT NO.-6, KNOWLEDGE PARK-2, GREATER NOIDA
 11

while using this maxim in his,‘The Interpretation of Statutes’, he described it in the following
words “When two or more words susceptible of analogous meaning are coupled together, they
are understood to be used in their cognate sense taking colors from each other.”

EJUSDEM GENERIS:

The words used in the statutes are to be read carefully. Sometimes the provision or the law may
haveintended specific meaning and the word used in the statutes may have a wide meaning in
common usage. In such cases, only the specific meaning is to be taken and not the widened
meaning. The Black’s Law Dictionary defines this law maxim as follows, “A canon of
construction that when a general word or phrase follows a list of specifics, the general word or
phrase will be interpreted to include only items of the same type as those listed.”. The literal
meaning of the maxim is that, “of the same kind”. The maxim takes its literal meaning to be used
in the construction.

UT RES MAGIS VALEAT QUAM PEREAT:

As seen before in the maxim of ejusdem generis, sometimes the provisions in the statute may
give two different complete construction meanings. In these cases, the meaning which fails the
intent of the statute or contradicts other provisions of the legislature should be avoided and the
meaning which coincides with other provisions of the statute should be taken into consideration.
The literal meaning of the maxim means, “it is better for a thing to have an effect than to be
made void, i.e., it is better to validate a thing than to invalidate it.”

CONTEMPORANEA EXPOSITO EST FORTISSIMA IN LEGE:

INNOVATIVE INSTITUTE OF LAW

PLOT NO.-6, KNOWLEDGE PARK-2, GREATER NOIDA
 12

In the legal framework, the maxim “Contemporanea Expositio Est Fortissima in Lege” means
that the finest way to interpret a text is to read it as it would have read when it was construed. It
is often mentioned that the best description of a legislature or any verbal construction is that from
the current authority description. Lord Coke laid down the maxim and was used while
interpreting earlier legislations, but typically the maxim was not used to construe contemporary
legislations as comparatively.It is apparent that the language of legislationshould be taken in the
manner in which it was meant when it was drafted. The meaning which the legislators meant and
those who subsisted at the time when the Act was enacted may judiciously be made-up to be well
aware than the later generations.

EXPRESSIO UNIUS EST EXCLUSIO ALTERIUS:

The maxim “Expressio Unius Est Exclusio Alterius” is used in many legal interpretations which
plainly explains that the “explicit mention of one thing is the exclusion of another”. This means
that when one specific object refersto a particular thing is overtly stated in a provision of a
legislature, then all further things are not to be considered while interpreting or implementing the
law mentioned.

REDDENDO SINGULA SINGULIS:

“Reddendo Singula Singulis” is a legal maxim and a Latin phrase which literally means,
“referring each to each”. It is often said the maxim is a grammar-based construction used
inearlier legislation and is still in practice as many of the current legislative laws of India are as
old as the law was first introduced to the country. The principle of the maxim refers and deals
with the use of a word in the provision distributive with each other word. For instance, when

INNOVATIVE INSTITUTE OF LAW

PLOT NO.-6, KNOWLEDGE PARK-2, GREATER NOIDA
 13

there is a composite line of provision which has more than one subject and object, then it shall be
the right construction to provide each to each, by reading the provisiondistributive and reading
along each object to its appropriate subject. A parallel rule of constructive reading shall be made
to verbs and the respective subjects, and to any other parts of speech.

INNOVATIVE INSTITUTE OF LAW

PLOT NO.-6, KNOWLEDGE PARK-2, GREATER NOIDA