Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 5 of 5 (0.67 seconds)

State 0F Bombay & Others vs The Hospital Mazdoor Sabha & Others on 29 January, 1960

The principle of statutory interpretation by which a generic word receives a limited interpretation by reason of its context is well established. In the context with which we are concerned, we can legitimately draw upon the "nosci- tur a sociis" principle. This expression simply means that "the meaning of a word is to be judged by the company it keeps." Gajendragadkar, J. explained the scope of the rule in State v. Hospital Mazdoor Sabha, [1960] 2 SCR 866 in the following words:
Supreme Court of India Cites 18 - Cited by 550 - P B Gajendragadkar - Full Document

Collector Of Central Excise, Bombay-I & ... vs Parle Exports (P) Ltd on 22 November, 1988

As explained in Collector of Central Excise v. Parle Exports (P) Ltd., [1989] 1 SCC 345 at p. 357 and Tata Oil Mills Co. Ltd. v.C.C.E., [1989] 4 SCC 541 at p. 545-6 in interpreting the scope of any notification, the Court has first to keep in mind the object and purpose of the notifi- cation. All parts of it should be read harmoniously in aid of, and not in derogation, of that purpose. In this case, the aim and object of the notification is to grant a conces- sion to small scale factories which manufacture paper with unconventional raw materials. The question naturally arises:
Supreme Court of India Cites 11 - Cited by 103 - S Mukharji - Full Document
1