Noscitur a Sociis
Noscitur a Sociis legal meaning, translation and judicial precedents.
Meaning & Judicial Interpretation: (اردو مفہوم اور قانونی تشریح)
Application
Noscitur a Sociis S. 6 (2)-Each class of suit mentioned in subsection (2) of S. 6 is a suit against and not by a member of a minority community-Interpretation of statutes-Maxim : Noscitur a sociis : a word is known by the company it keeps-Object of Ordinance
Interpretation of statutes-Intent of Legislature to be seen where literal construction leads to repugnancy to purpose of statute or is unreasonable or more than one interpretation is possible-[Secretary of State v. Mask & Co. A I R 1940 P C 105; The Attorney-General of Canada v. Hallet Carey Ltd. P L D 1952 P C 29; Maxwell on Interpretation of Statutes, 9th Edn., pp. 63, 332; Special Reference No. 1 of 1957 P L D 1957 S C 219; Craies' Treaties on Statute Law, 4th Edn., p. 95; Woking Muslim Mission v. Crown P L D 1956 F C 209;
"Noscitur a Sociis", Pakistan Law Portal, available at: https://paklawportal.com/words-terms-maxims/3141
Precedents & Case Laws citing "Noscitur a Sociis"
P L D 1993 Karachi 656
MUHAMMAD AMJAD ‑‑‑ Petitioner Versus GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN and others ‑‑‑ Respondents
Court:2025 C L C 1961
GHAZANFAR AMIN — Petitioner Versus PROVINCE OF PUNJAB and others — Respondents
Court: Lahore (Bahawalpur Bench)2001 P T D 1755
STONECRAFT ENTERPRISES Versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME‑TAX
Court: 237 1 T R 131P L D 1973 Lahore 837
Applicant Versus THE COMMISSIONER OF SALES TAX, NORTH ZONE,
Court:1973 P T D 453
MESSRS KASHMIR POTTERY WORKS, SIALKOT Versus THE COMMISSIONER OF SALES TAX. NORTH ZONE, WEST PAKISTAN, LAHORE
Court: Lahore (Pakistan)P L D 1970 Dacca 78
MUSTAFIZUR RAHMAN‑Petitioner Versus BERNARD JOSEPH ROZARIO AND OTHERS‑Defendant
Court: East Pakistan Displaced Persons (Rehabilitation) Ordinance (I of 1964), S. 6 (2)‑Each class of suit mentioned in subsection (2) of S. 6 is a suit against and not by a member of a minority commu nity‑Interpretation of statutes‑Maxim : Noscitur a sociis : a word is known by the company it keeps‑Object of Ordinance ---Interpretation of statutes‑Intent of Legislature to be seen where literal construction leads to repugnancy to purpose of statute or is unreasonable or more than one interpretation is possible‑Secretary of State v. Mask & Co. A I R 1940 P C 105; The Attorney‑Gene ral of Canada v. Hallet Carey Ltd. P L D 1952 P C 29; Maxwell on Interpretation of Statutes, 9th Edn., pp. 63, 332; Special Refer ence No. 1 of 1957 P L D 1957 S C 219; Craies' Treaties on Statute Law, 4th Edn., p. 95; Woking Muslim Mission v. Crown P L D 1956 F C 209; Amiruddin v. West Punjab Province P L D 1956 F C 220; S. A. Haroon v. Collector of Customs, Karachi P L D 1956 S C (Pak.) 177; Muhammad Amin Khan v. Controller of Estate Duty P L D 1961 S C 120; Commissioner of Income‑tax, East Pakistan v. Hossen Kasam Dada P L D 1961 S C 375 ref. and Government of Pakistan v. Syed Akhlaque Hussain P L D 1965 S C 527 considered.2026 P Cr
Muhammad Siddique — Appellant Versus The State and another — Respondents
Court: Lahore (Bahawalpur Bench)2023 P T D 268
ZAKA UD DIN MALIK Versus FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN and others
Court: Lahore High Court2016 P T D 2111
Messrs ASFAQ TRADING COMPANY through Proprietor Versus COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS, MODEL CUSTOMS COLLECTORATE, LAHORE through Deputy Collector of Customs (Group-1), Lahore
Court: Lahore High Court2012 P T D (Trib
Messrs VENUS PAKISTAN (PVT.) LTD., ISLAMABAD Versus ADDITIONAL COLLECTOR CUSTOMS, DTRE, AFU, BBI, ISLAMABAD and 2 others
Court: Customs, Federal Excise and Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal