23_General clauses act.pptx

General clauses act

1. General Clauses Act

2. This act is not confined to a particular branch of the law, but applies to all branches. The General Clauses Act makes provisions as to the construction of General Acts and other laws of all India application. The General Clauses Act, 1897 contains ‘definitions’ of some words and also some general principles of interpretation. This is an Act intends to provide general definitions which shall be applicable to all Central Acts and Regulations where there is no definition in those Acts or regulations that emerge with the provisions of the Central Acts or regulations, unless there is anything repugnant in the subject or context.

3. The General Clauses Act has been enacted to shorten language used in parliamentary legislation and to avoid the repetition of the same words in the same course of the same piece of legislation. Act is meant to avoid the superfluity of language in a statute wherever it is possible to do so. Example : Wherever the law provides that court will have the power to appoint, suspend or remove a receiver, the legislature simply enacted that wherever convenient the court may appoint receiver and it was implied within that language that it may also remove or suspend him. ( Rayarappan V. Madhavi Amma , A.I.R. 1950 F.C. 140) The General Clauses Act, 1897 was enacted on 11th March, 1897 to consolidate and extend the General Clauses Act, 1868 and 1887.

4. Objects of the Act • (1) to shorten the language of central Acts; • (2) to provide, as far as possible, for uniformity of, expression in central Acts, by giving definitions of a series of terms in common use; •(3) to state explicitly certain convenient rules the construction and interpretation of Central Acts; and • (4 ) to guard against slips and oversights by importing into every Act certain common form clauses, which otherwise ought to be inserted expressly in every Central Act.

5. The General Clauses Act, or, for that matter, the Interpretation Act of any other country, codifies all the ‘rules’ of statutory interpretation. The so- called rules of interpretation are really in the nature of guide-lines, and are not to be treated as mathematical formula. In fact, even the definitions contained in the General Clauses Act apply only where the context does not otherwise require.

6. The Chief Inspector of Mines v. Karam Chand Thapar It stated that the purpose of this Act is to place in one single Statute different provisions as regards interpretation of words and legal principles which would otherwise have to be specified separately in many different Acts and regulations. The purpose of the Act is to avoid superfluity of language in statutes wherever it is possible to do so. The General Clauses Act thus makes provisions as to the construction of General and other laws of all-India application

7. STATE ACTS Every state has its own General clauses Act , which applies to State Acts. The lead in this matter was taken by the former presidencies of Bombay, Bengal The earliest Act on the subject was Bombay Act 10 of 1866. The first General Clauses Act in Madras and Bengal was enacted in 1867. The Central Act of 1897 has stood the test of time. Its value in avoiding superfluity of language in statutes has been commended by courts. There can be no better testimony of its utility than the fact that courts have, on considerations of equity, justice and good conscience, thought fit to extend its principles not only to subordinate legislation, but also to private documents. The Act has also served as a model for all States General Clauses Acts. The Act has been expressly applied to interpretation of the Constitution by Article 367 of the Constitution.

8. Coming into operation of enactments Sections 5 to 13 – Sections 5 to 13 of the Act contains, general rules of Construction, other than definitions. These sections fall under two broad groups. – First, there are sections dealing with the commencement and repeal of enactments.– Secondly, there are sections which provide for other general rules of construction. The Act does not contain any detailed provisions relating to the use in interpretation of marginal notes, headings, punctuations and the like.

9. REPEAL Section 6 of the Act deals with repeal. Its main object is to reverse the common law rule that a repeal obliterates the, statute for all purposes for the future OTHER PROVISIONS BODY OF PERSONS: Whenever an enactment has to incorporate a body of person, it has to expressly – provide, in a separate section, for many matters dealing with the effect of incorporation. POWERS AND FUNCTIONARIES: – Provisions as to power and functionaries are contained in sections 14- 19 of the Act.

10. • Construction of notifications, etc., issued under enactments, • Power to issue, to include power to add to, amend, vary or rescind notifications, orders, rules, or bye-laws • Making of rules or bye-laws and issuing of orders between passing and commencement of enactment • Provisions applicable to making of rules or bye-laws after previous publication • Continuation of orders, etc , issued under enactments repealed and re- enacted, • Recovery of fines • Provisions as to offences punishable under two or more enactments • Meaning of service by post • Citation of enactments

11. Saving for previous enactment, rules any bye-laws, Application of Act to Ordinances Application of Act to Acts made by the governor-general Construction of references to Local Government of a Province

12. Hathibudi Anandar v. Govindan According to S.3(57) of the General Clauses Act, the expression “son” is defined as “in the case of any one whose personal law permits adoption, shall include an adopted son..” the tenant petitioner, who has occupied the non-residential building, refused to vacate it. The landlord has required the building bona fide for establishing retail business for his foster son. On the petitioner’s refusal, the landlord obtained an eviction order under S.10(3)(a) (iii) of the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, 1961. But in the revision petition, the tenant questioned the validity of the eviction order. He contended that he could not be evicted to accommodate the land lord's foster son. The court examined whether the “foster son” would be a 'member of the family' occurring in S. 10(3) (a) (iii)58 and S. 2(6-A), of the said Act.59 The Court observed:

13. A son, in the generally accepted sense, is one who is begotten. Most legal systems also recognize, as a son, one who is taken in adoption. But a foster son is neither begotten, nor taken in adoption. He is merely fostered, that is so say, brought up by his foster parent. He lacks the vital element which attaches to a natural-born son. He lacks too the legal cognition which is accorded to an adopted son. His relationship to the foster parent is not a jural relationship; it is a sentimental relationship, pure and simple.

14. A foster son is thus no son at all. The suffix 'son' is permitted to him only as a matter of common courtesy. It follows, therefore, that he cannot be held to be a member of the landlord's family within the meaning of Section 2(6-A) of the Act. Thus the Madras High Court did not include the “foster son” within the meaning of “Son”. On the basis of this interpretation, it further held that a landlord cannot invoke S. 10(3)(a) (iii) of the said Act to compel his tenant to make way for his foster son

15. K.V.Muthu v. Angamuthu Ammal , decision was reversed by the Supreme Court A similar question under S.2 (6A) of the Tamil Nadu Building (Lease and Rent Control) Act came before the Supreme Court. In the instant case, the deceased Thiruvannamalai Bakthar , who carried on the lime-shell business, executed a will in favour of his wife (respondent) and his foster son Arunachala Bakthar , who was the son of his real brother. In order to carry on her husband business on the said premises, she applied for an eviction order. The appellant took the plea that Arunachala Bakthar was not the natural son of the deceased Thiruvannamalai Bakthar .

16. The Supreme Court made a reference to the ancient and modern Hindu Law and Re Divi Dita . In the light of the above mentioned references, the court found the term “son” to be a flexible one. It also resorted to dictionary meaning of the following words: foster son, foster brother, foster mother and foster sister the court interpreted that the “Foster Son” is a son who is not the real son or direct descendant of a person after his marriage. Regarding the issue of the instant case, the court found that the foster son was a blood relation of the deceased and heir to his property. He was also very devoted to his foster father and carried on his business. Based on the above facts, the Supreme Court observed that Arunachala Bakthar was clearly a member.

17. Thank You