Statutes, Construction of
Statutes, Construction of legal meaning, translation and judicial precedents.
Meaning & Judicial Interpretation: (اردو مفہوم اور قانونی تشریح)
Statutes, Construction of -For benefit of one individual case certainty of law cannot be disturbed. It is a well settled rule of law that it is better that hardship would be caused in one or two individual cases than that the certainty of law, particularly of statute, should in any way be disturbed by artificial constructions. When the language of a provision is clear, it cannot be strained or twisted by the Court In order to make it yield what is thought to be beneficial meaning.
"Statutes, Construction of", Pakistan Law Portal, available at: https://paklawportal.com/words-terms-maxims/22017
Precedents & Case Laws citing "Statutes, Construction of"
P L D 1983 Lahore 24
DUR MUHAMMAD-Petitioner Versus Tam STATE-Respondent
Court: S. 497(1), proviso third, para. (6)-Bail to accused detained for over two years-Interpretation of statutes-Construction of statutes to be beneficial to citizen-Two interpretations possible, on consistent with reason to be adopted and one leading to absurdity or unreasonableness or patent injustice to citizen to be avoided-Wholly illogical, hence, to penalize accused for no wrongful act on his part-Construction placed on provision of statutes-To be such as would suppress mischief and advance remedy-Interpretation of proviso that periods of justifiable delays, result of bona fide. acts of accused or his counsel deserve no deduction from period of delay of two years-Advances remedy of bail to undertrial prisoners and suppresses mischief of keeping them in jail for unnecessary period-Held : Delay caused in conclusion of trial due to bona fide act or omission on part of undertrial prisoner or any one else on his behalf not deductable from period prescribed in third proviso to S. 497(1).-Interpretation of statutes.2005 P L C (C
Dr. ANJUM SYED Versus FEDERAL PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION through Chairman, Islamabad and 3 others
Court: Lahore High Court1983 P Cr
Khan ABDUL HAMID KHAN‑Appellant Versus THE STATE‑Respondent
Court: Supreme Court (A J & K)2021 P T D 1867
Messrs CIVIL AVIATION AUTHORITY through Authorized Representative Versus APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INLAND REVENUE and another
Court: Sindh High CourtP L D 1958 Dacca 315
KABUL HAQUE‑Petitioner Versus Sm. LALJAN BIBI and others‑=Opposite Parties
Court:1988 S C M R 91
Messrs STANDARD PRINTING PRESS — Appellant Versus SIND EMPLOYEES' SOCIAL SECURITY INSTITUTION — Respondent
Court: ---S. 1(3)--Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. .25--Interpretation of statute--Elementary principle and golden rule of--Statute- Construction of--Value of punctuation--Notification issued by Government under S. 1(3) of Ordinance (k of 1965) impugned as ultra vires of S.1(3), discriminatory and violative of Art.25 of Constitution--- Construction of statute examined--Held: While construing any statute Court should adhere to ordinary meaning of the words used and to their grammatical construction, unless the words when so read produce some manifest absurdity or injustice, inconsistency, inconvenience or incongruity; or unless the meaning so given be repugnant to the context, or at variance with the intention of Legislature as it is stated expressly or by implication, or as it may be collected from other parts of the same statute--Held further: Punctuation of statute is not traditionally regarded as its essential part and it can be disregarded of supplied--Where a statute is ambiguous, its punctuation may and should be considered and given weight especially where the act is carefully punctuated--If the punctuation is in accord with the suggested meaning of the statute, it is an important additional reason for the acceptance of that meaning--It should be given weight unless, from the punctuation of the whole statute, it is apparent that the punctuation must be disregarded in order to arrive at the legislative intention--In order to ascertain intention and purpose of the legislation, it is necessary to read the various provisions of the statute, so as to construe it as a whole.--Interpretation of statute.P L D 1970 Lahore 140
MUHAMMAD HUSSAIN‑Petitioner Versus Mian MAHMOOD AHMAD AND 3 OTHERS -Respondents
Court:1998 S C M R 2207
Messrs STATE CEMENT CORPORATION OF PAKISTAN LTD. ‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS, KARACHI and another‑‑‑Respondents
Court: Supreme Court of PakistanP L D 1968 Lahore 321
KARAM DIN‑Petitioner Versus (1) MEMBER, BOARD OF REVENUE, WEST PAKISTAN, LAHORE,
Court:1987 C L C 176
MUHAMMAD JAMIL‑‑Appellant Versus MUHAMMAD RAHIM‑‑Respondent
Court: Karachi