Bharat Co-Operative Bank (Mumbai) Ltd vs Co-Operative Bank Employees Union on 22 March, 2007
In the case of Bharat Co-operative Bank (Mumbai)
Ltd. v. Co-operative Bank Employees Union 2007(5)
SCALE 57, this Court has held that when the word 'includes'
is used in the definition, as is the case under Section 2(g) of
the 1994 Act, the legislature does not intend to restrict the
definition; it makes the definition enumerative and not
exhaustive, that is to say, the term defined will retain its
ordinary meaning but its scope would be extended to bring
within the term certain matters which in its ordinary
meaning may or may not comprise. Applying the above test
to the term 'cooked food' in Section 2(g) of the 1994 Act we
find that the said term uses the word 'includes' in the
definition. The said term 'cooked food' makes the definition
enumerative when it includes within the said term sweets,
batasha, mishri, shrikhand, doodpat, tea and coffee. When it
enumerates items like sweets, mishri, batasha, dhoodpak,
tea and coffee the enumerated items help us to probe into the
legislative intent. The legislative intent in the present case
under Section 2(g) is to include consumables. 'Fryums' in
the present case at the relevant time were not directly
consumable. They were under-cooked items. They were
semi-cooked items. They required further process of frying
and addition of preservatives to make them consumables
even after the specified time. But for the preservatives the
items would have become stale.