Skip to main content

Followers

Question- 10 सजातीय व्याख्या के नियम का वर्णन कीजिए। निर्णीत वादों की सहायता से समझाइये।

 Describe the rule of 'Ejusdem Generis'.  Discuss with help of decided cases.

Answer-10

The rule of Ejusdem Generis is a principle used in the interpretation of statutes to limit the meaning of general words to things of the same kind or nature as those specifically mentioned before them. It is particularly applied when a list of specific items is followed by general words, and it helps to avoid ambiguity by interpreting the general words to cover only things that are similar to the specific items.

Key Features:

1.            Specific to General Pattern: The rule applies where specific words or terms are followed by more general terms. The general terms will be understood to include only things that fall within the same category or class as the specific terms mentioned.

2.            Limitations on General Words: General terms are not to be interpreted in their broadest possible sense but are restricted to the same class of items or category that the specific terms fall into.

3.            Used to Clarify Ambiguity: This rule resolves ambiguity in legal language, especially in statutes that contain general terms after listing specific examples. It limits the general term to the meaning that fits with the specific terms used before it.

Application of the Rule:

             General Words: These are words that are vague and broad in scope.

             Specific Words: These are words that are concrete and limited in scope, used to describe a particular class or type of thing.

             Example: If a statute refers to “vehicles, cars, trucks, bicycles, and other vehicles,” the general word “other vehicles” will be interpreted to mean something of the same nature as cars, trucks, and bicycles, such as motorcycles, but not airplanes or boats, which are in a different class.

Decided Cases:

1.            Bennett v. Industrial Accident Commission (1919): In this case, the court applied the Ejusdem Generis rule to interpret a statute referring to "vehicles, locomotives, and other machinery." The court held that the phrase "other machinery" was restricted to machinery of the same kind or class as locomotives and vehicles, thereby excluding machinery like printing presses or computers that did not share the same nature as locomotives or vehicles.

2.            Attorney General v. Hinks (2000): In this case, the court relied on Ejusdem Generis to interpret a statute that listed specific offenses and followed them with a general phrase "any other offense." The court ruled that the general term would be understood to refer to offenses of the same nature as those explicitly listed, ensuring the application of the rule.

3.            R v. Bishop of Oxford (1877): This case involved the interpretation of the phrase "tithes, rents, profits, and other income" in a statute. The court used Ejusdem Generis to argue that the general term "other income" should be interpreted in a manner consistent with tithes, rents, and profits, meaning it should refer to income of a similar nature rather than including all possible forms of income.

4.            Inland Revenue Commissioners v. Frere (1965): In this case, the court used Ejusdem Generis to interpret the term “interest, annuities, and other annual payments” in tax legislation. The court ruled that “other annual payments” should be understood to refer to payments similar to interest and annuities, thus excluding other forms of annual payments that didn't share the same characteristics.

Steps in Applying Ejusdem Generis:

1.            Examine the specific words: Identify the list of specific items or terms in the statute.

2.            Identify the general word: Look for a general term following the specific list.

3.            Determine the category: Analyze the specific items to identify the category or class they represent.

4.            Restrict the general term: Interpret the general word in the context of that category or class, limiting its meaning to things of the same kind.

Limitations of Ejusdem Generis:

             Wide discretion of the legislature: If the legislature’s intention is clear from the context, the rule should not restrict the interpretation unduly. Sometimes, the use of the word "other" may be intended to include a wider range than just the same class.

             Ambiguity: The rule may not apply where the legislative intent is too vague or unclear, and the court may need to consider other rules of statutory interpretation, like the literal rule or purposive approach.

Conclusion:

The Ejusdem Generis rule is an essential tool for interpreting statutes with specific and general terms. It ensures that general terms are not given an overly broad meaning but are confined to the same class as the specific words preceding them. By relying on this rule, courts avoid unintended interpretations, and it promotes clarity and fairness in the application of the law.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

चिल्ड्रन डे की ढ़ेरों बधाईयां

  मेरे प्यारे नन्हें बच्चों!   पहले, मैं सभी बच्चों को इस दिन की बहुत-बहुत शुभकामनाएँ देना चाहता हूँ। आप सभी इस दुनिया का सबसे अनमोल हिस्सा हैं। आपके शिक्षक उम्र और तजुर्बे में आपसे काफी बड़े है, बढ़ती उम्र उनके माथे में अनायास सिकन लाती है l दुनियाभर की बेमतलब जिम्मेदारियों के बोझ में शिक्षक को सुकून तब मिलता है जब आपका मुस्कुराता हुआ चेहरा सामने आता है l आपको शायद अभी इसका अहसास न हो, लेकिन इस बात में कोई दो राय नहीं है कि आप सभी उस ईश्वर/भगवान या उस अलौकिक परमतत्व के प्रतिरूप है l  चिल्ड्रन डे, जो कि हमारे प्रिय पंडित जवाहरलाल नेहरू के जन्मदिन पर मनाया जाता है, हमें यह याद दिलाता है कि बच्चों का भविष्य हमारे समाज का भविष्य है। नेहरू जी ने हमेशा बच्चों के विकास और शिक्षा को प्राथमिकता दी। उन्होंने कहा था कि "बच्चे हमारे भविष्य हैं," और यही कारण है कि हमें उन्हें प्यार, देखभाल और सही दिशा में मार्गदर्शन देना चाहिए। आज का दिन सिर्फ उत्सव मनाने के लिए नहीं हैं, बल्कि हमें यह भी सोचना है कि हम बच्चों को कैसे एक सुरक्षित, खुशहाल और समृद्ध जीवन दे सकते हैं। हमें बच्चों क...

1. B.Shah vs. Presiding Officer, Labour Court, AIR 1978 SC 12

 Ref : AIR 1978 SC 12 Sub :- This case is based on Section 5 of the Maternity Benefit Act, 1961 Facts of the case:- 1. A woman by the name of Sulbamal worked in an industry named Mount Stuart Estate which was related to planta- tion. 2. Sulbamal gave an application for maternity leave. The estimated period for delivery was 16-12-1967 and she deliv- ered the child on this very date. 3. Maternity benefit was given by way of salary for 72 work- ing days by the employer to the woman workman, but in this period Sunday being the holiday, was excluded by the employer. 4. Thus, being dissatisfied with the amount so provided, she filed an application before the employer in this regard. 5. It was demanded by the woman workman that she should be given full benefit of 12 weeks under the provisions of the Maternity Benefit Act, 1961 which is of full 84 days, not of 72 days because Sunday is also included in it. 6. But, she was denied of the payment of full 84 days by the employer. Trial Court...

भारत का सर्वोच्च न्यायालय

  संगठन चार्ट प्रधान सचिव रजिस्ट्रार (न्यायिक सूचीकरण) अतिरिक्त रजिस्ट्रार उप रजिस्ट्रार सहायक रजिस्ट्रार / एआर-सह-पीएस शाखा अधिकारी/कोर्ट मास्टर व्यवहार करने वाले अधिकारी रजिस्ट्रार (न्यायिक प्रशासन) अतिरिक्त रजिस्ट्रार उप रजिस्ट्रार सहायक रजिस्ट्रार शाखा अधिकारी व्यवहार करने वाले अधिकारी रजिस्ट्रार (खरीद एवं भंडार) अतिरिक्त रजिस्ट्रार उप रजिस्ट्रार सहायक रजिस्ट्रार शाखा अधिकारी व्यवहार करने वाले अधिकारी रजिस्ट्रार-I (गोपनीय कक्ष) अतिरिक्त रजिस्ट्रार उप रजिस्ट्रार सहायक रजिस्ट्रार शाखा अधिकारी व्यवहार करने वाले अधिकारी रजिस्ट्रार (न्यायाधीश प्रशासन एवं अंतर्राष्ट्रीय संबंध) अतिरिक्त रजिस्ट्रार उप रजिस्ट्रार सहायक रजिस्ट्रार शाखा अधिकारी व्यवहार करने वाले अधिकारी रजिस्ट्रार (प्रौद्योगिकी) अतिरिक्त रजिस्ट्रार उप रजिस्ट्रार सहायक रजिस्ट्रार(कंप्यूटर) शाखा अधिकारी व्यवहार करने वाले अधिकारी/ तकनीक. सहायक-सह-प्रोग्रामर रजिस्ट्रार-II (गोपनीय कक्ष) अतिरिक्त रजिस्ट्रार उप रजिस्ट्रार सहायक रजिस्ट्रार शाखा अधिकारी व्यवहार करने वाले अधिकारी रजिस्ट्रार (न्यायालय एवं भवन) अतिरिक्त रजिस्ट्रार उप...