Supreme Court of India
SURJIT SINGHversusMAHANAGAR TELEPHONE NIGAM LTD.
- Citation
- 2008 INSC 499
- Decided
- 21 April 2008
- Disposal
- Dismissed
- Bench
- H K SEMA
Holding
A telephone line in the name of a subscriber may be disconnected for non‑payment of dues of a line in the name of an economically dependent relative, and Rule 443 must be interpreted purposively, not literally.
Summary
Surjit Singh had three telephone lines – two in his name (residential and business) and one in his wife’s name. The wife, a housewife, was financially dependent on him and the line in her name had unpaid dues. Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd. disconnected the two lines in Singh’s name under Rule 443 of the Indian Telegraph Rules. Singh challenged the disconnection, arguing that the rule should not apply to his lines because the default was by his wife. The Supreme Court examined the meaning of “subscriber” under Rule 2(PP) and adopted a purposive interpretation of Rule 443, holding that when a relative is economically dependent on the subscriber, the subscriber’s line can be disconnected for the relative’s non‑payment. The Court rejected the literal reading, applied Mimamsa principles, and dismissed the appeal.
Issues considered
- The scope of Rule 443 of the Indian Telegraph Rules regarding disconnection of a subscriber’s telephone line for non‑payment of dues of a line in the name of a dependent relative.
- Whether the definition of ‘subscriber’ in Rule 2(PP) should be given a literal or purposive construction.
- Whether a housewife who is financially dependent on her husband can be treated as a ‘nominal subscriber’ whose dues affect the husband’s lines.
Legislation cited
- Telegraph Rules, 1951s. Rule 2(PP), s. Rule 443
Subjects
telephone line disconnectionIndian Telegraph RulesRule 443statutory interpretationpurposive constructiondependent spousesubscriber definitiontelecommunication law
Judgment
[2008] 6 S.C.R. 683
SURJIT SINGH A
v.
MAHANAGAR TELEPHONE NIGAM LTD.
(Civil Appeal No. 5354 of 2002)
APRIL 21, 2008
B
(H.K. SEMA AND MARKANDEY KAT JU, JJ.)
Indian .Telegraph Rules; Rr. 2(PP) and 443:
Disconnection of Telephone - Mahanagar Telephone
Nigam Ltd. disconnecting telephone lines in the name of c
husband for non-payment of dues of telephone line in the
name of wife - Correctness of- Held: Wife of the appellant is
a house-wife having no independent source of income and,
thus, economically dependent on him - Telephone line of
relative, on whom subscriber is economically dependent, can D
be disconnected on ground of non-payment of telephone bill
by the nominal subscriber - Intention of the legislature in
framing r. 443 was that payment of the telephone bills should
be made promptly - Rule 443 has to be construed in the
context in which it was made and the purpose and object which E
it has to achieve - A literal interpretation of the rule would
frustrate its object - Hence, a purposive construction of the
rule in question has to be adopted - Construing so, authorities
were right in disconnecting telephone line of the appellant at
his residence and at his business premises for non-payment F
... of dues in the name of his dependent wife - Interpretation of
Statutes - Mimansa Rules of Interpretation - Linga/Lakshna
principle - Applicability of
Words and Phrases:
G
'Subscriber' - Meaning of in the context of r.2(PP) of the
Indian Telegraph Rules .
• Respondent disconnected two telephone lines of the
appellant, one at his residence and the other at his
683 H
684 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2008] 6 S.C.R.
A business premises for non-payment of arrears of
telephone dues in connection with the telephone line in
the name of his wife. Challenging the order of the
authorities, the appellant filed a writ petition in the High
Court, which was dismissed by a Single Judge of the High
B Court. Appeal filed thereagainst was dismissed by the
Division Bench of the High Court. Hence, the present
appeal.
Appellant contended that in terms of Rule 443 the
Indian Telegraph Rules, telephone lines in his name could
C not have been disconnected because of non-payment of
dues in respect of the telephone line in the name of his
wife.
Dismissing the appeal, the Court
D HELD: 1.1 Wife of the appellant is a housewife, who
is living with him at his residential premises. It has not •
been alleged that she has an independent source of
income by doing some business or by some service etc.
In these circumstances, it can be inferred that the payment
E of the bill of the telephone line in the name of his wife was
being made by the appellant himself since his wife has
no independent source of income and is economically
dependent on him. (Para - 10) [690-8, C, DJ
1.2 In the case of a person who is economically
F dependent on another who is paying his telephone bills,
the telephone line in the name of such other relative on
whom the subscriber is dependent can be disconnected
for non-payment of the telephone bills of the nominal
subscriber. (Para -19) [693-A, B, CJ
G
2.1 It is true that on a literal interpretation of r. 443 of
the Indian Telegraph Rules, the contention of counsel for
the appellant would have to be accepted. However, in this
case, the literal rule has neit to be adopted, because this
Court has to see the intention of the rule. The intention
:I
SURJIT SINGH v. MAHANAGAR TELEPHONE 685
NIGAM LTD.
obviously was that payment of telephone dues should A
be made promptly, otherwise the telephone department
will suffer. This Court, therefore, to take an interpretation
which effectuates and furthers the intention of r. 443, i.e.
the telephone bills should be paid in time. (Para - 21)
[693-D, E] B
2.2 In the case of a wife who is a housewife and is
economically dependent on her husband, obviously the
telephone bills in connection with the telephone line in
her name are being paid by her husband and not by
herself. Hence, a purposive construction has to be C
adopted in this case and not to go by the literal rule of
interpretation. (Para - 22) [693-F]
2.3 No doubt, ordinarily the literal rule should be
applied while interpreting a statute or statutory rule, but
0
the literal rule is not always the only rule of interpretation
of a provision in a statute, and in exceptional cases the
literal rule can be departed from. It follows that to interpret
a statute one has to sometimes consider the context in
which it has been made and the purpose and object which
it seeks to achieve. A too literal interpretation may E
sometimes frustrate the very object of the statute, and
such an approach should be eschewed by the Court.
(Paras - 23 & 24) [693-G, H; 694-D, E]
R.L. Arora vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and others (1964) 6 F
SCR 784 - followed.
3. In the Mimansa system, the literal rule of
interpretation is called the Shruti (or Abhida) principle, and
ordinarily it is this principle which is to be applied when
interpreting a text. However, there are exceptional G
situations when one has to depart from the literal rule nnd
then certain other principles have to be resorted to e.g.
(1) the Linga (also called Lakshana) principle or the
suggestive power of words or expressions, (2) the V<ikya
principle or syntactical arrangement, (3) the Pra!<:irana H
686 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2008] 6 S.C.R.
A principle, which permits construction by referring to other
texts in order to make the meaning clear, (4) the Sthana
(position) principle which means the relative position of
one text with reference to another, (5) the Samakhya (name)
principle which means the connection between different
8 passages by the indication accorded by the derivative
words of a compound name. In the present case, the Linga
(Lakshana) principle will apply. Linga really means
interpretation by understanding the context, and it is a
departure from the literal rule of interpretation. (Paras 38,
c 39 and 40) [699-A-E]
U. P Bhoodan Yagna Samiti vs. Brij Kishore AIR 1988
SC 2239 - relied on.
'Mimansa Rules of Interpretation' by Prof. K. L. Sarkar -
referred to.
0
4. In both the systems of interpretation, the l\ilimansa It
system as well as Maxwell's system, it is emphasized that
the intention of a statute has vften to be seen to properly
interpret it, and it is not that the Court can never depart
E from the literal rule of interpretation. It all depends on the
context, the subject-matter, the purpose for which the
provision was made, etc. (Para - 53) [704-C, D]
S.S. Katra vs. Union of India (1991) 2 SCC 87 - relied
on.
F
"Principles of Statutory Interpretation" 9th Edition, 2004
by G.P. Singh - referred to.
5.1 While construing r. 443, one has to give an
interpr:atation which subserves the intention of the Rule
G which is that telephone bills should be promptly paid,
other11ise the department will be short of the funds needed
for financing the telephone service:; which are to be
rendered to the consumers. After all, the salary of the
employees of the telephone departr.-;ent have to be paid,
H the telephone equipment has to be maintained, repaired
SURJIT SINGH v. MAHANAGAR TELEPHONE 687
NIGAM LTD.
and kept up-to-date. Sometimes new technology has to A
be introduced. There may be various other requirements
for which funds may be required, and all these can only
be possible if the telephone bills are paid in time. Hence,
the word 'subscriber' in Rule 2(pp) has to be given a wider
meaning. (Para - 57) [704-D, E, F] B
5.2 Rule 443 of the Rules has to be interpreted in a
purposive sense. Hence the telephone line in the name
of the person who is really paying the bills in connection
with the telephone line in the name of another person who
is economically dependent on the former can be C
disconnected for non payment of bills in connection with
the telephone line in the name of the latter. Such an
interpretation would effectuate the intention of r.443. It
would make no difference whether the telephone line is
at the residence or at the business premises, even if the D
• two are entirely separate. Hence, both the telephone lines
in the name of the appellant can be disconnected for non-
payment of the dues in connection with the line in the
name of his dependent wife. (Paras- 28 & 29) [698-D, E, :=,
G] E
Hindustan Lever Ltd. Vs. Ashok Vishnu Kate and Ors.
(1995) 6 sec 326 - relied on.
'Param Laghu Manjusha' by Nagesh Bhatt - referred
to. F
[This Court observed that the Mimansa Rules of
lnterpretaiton were the traditional principles of
interpretation used for over two and a half thousand years.
The Mimansa Principles were regularly used by our great
jurists. There is no reason why can't these principles be G
used on appropriate occasions. However, these
principles have rarely been used in our law Courts.]
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 5354
of 2002.
H
688 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2008] 6 S.C.R.
A From the final Judgment and Order dated 10.01.2002 of
the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi in LP.A. No. 665 of 2001.
R.K. Kapoor, Mukesh Kumar Verma, Shweta Kapoor,
Mansi Dhiman and Anis Ahmed Khan for the Appellant.
B Amarendra Saran, A.S.G., U.R. Rao, Madhu Sikri and Nidhi
for the Respondent.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
MARKANDEY KATJU, J. 1. This appeal by special leave
c has been filed against the impugned judgment of the Division
Bench of the Delhi High Court dated 10.1.2002 in LPA No. 665
of 2001.
2. Heard Shri R.L. Kapoor, learned counsel for the appellant
and Shri Amarendra Saran, !earned Addi. Solicitor General for
D the respondent.
3. The facts of the case are that the appellant and his wife
are living together at their residence in Rajouri Garden, Delhi.
At that residence, there is one telephone line bearing No.
E 5121187 in the name of appellant Surjit Singh and there is also
another telephone line bearing No. 5416493 at the same
residence in the name of the appellant's wife. There is a third
telephone line bearing No. 3265301 in the name of the appellant
and installed at the business premises of the appellant at 1195,
Chahrahat Building, Jama Masjid, Delhi.
F
4. It appears that there were arrears of telephone dues in "
connection with line No. 5416493 which was in the name of the
appellant's wife. For non-payment of the telephone dues in
connection with this line, the other two lines in the name of the
G appellant being 5121187 at his residential premises and line
No. 3265301 at his business premises were disconnected.
5. The contention of the appellant was that the telephone
lines in his own name being line No. 5121187 at his residence
and line No. 3265301 at his business premises should not be
H disconnected on account of non-payment of dues in connection
SURJIT SINGH v. MAHANAGAR TELEPHONE 689
NIGAM LTD. [MARKANDEY KATJU, J.]
' with the line in the name of his wife being line No. 5416493. He
contended that he and his wife are two separate legal entities,
A
and he could not be penalized for the fault of his wife .
.6. The appellant filed a writ petition in the Delhi High Court
which was dismissed by a learned Single Judge by his judgment
dated 25.9.2001 and his appeal before the Division Bench of B
the High Court was also dismissed by the impugned judgment
dated 10.1.2002. Hence, this appeal before this Court.
7. Learned counsel for the appellant has relied on Rule
443 of the Indian Telegraph Rules which states: c
"443. Default of payment - If, on or before the due date,
the rent or other charges in respect of the telephone service
provided are not paid by the subscriber in accordance
with these rules, or bills for charges in respect of calls of
phonograms or other dues from the subscriber are not D
duly paid by him, any telephone or telephones or any telex
service rented by him, may be disconnected without
notice. The telephone or telephones, or the telex so
disconnected may, if the Telegraph Authority thinks fit, be
restored, if the defaulting subscriber pays the outstanding E
dues and the reconnection fee together with the rental for
such portion of the intervening period as may be prescribed
by the Telegraph Authority from time to time. The subscriber
shall pay all the above charges within such period as may
be prescribed by the telegraph authority from time to time."
F
.... 8. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that in view
of Rule 443 the telephone lines in the name of the appellant
could not have been disconnected because of non-payment of
dues in respect of the line in the name of his wife.
9. Learned counsel for the appellant invited our attention G
to the decision of a Learned Single Judge of the Bombay High
4 Court in Dr. B. V Manek vs. Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd
AIR 1996 Born 53. We have carefully perused the aforesaid
decision and find that it is distinguishable. In that case, the
telephone line of the petitioner had been disconnected because H
690 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2008] 6 S.C.R.
A of non-payment of the dues of another line which was in the
name of his father. The learned Single Judge of the High Court
held that the Department cannot disconnect the telephone of
the subscriber on account of the default committed by a relation
of such subscriber. It has not been mentioned in the said
B decision of the Bombay High Court that the petitioner's father
was economically dependent on the petitioner.
10. In the present case which is before us it has come on
the record that the appellant's wife is a housewife who is living
with the appellant at his residential premises at Rajouri Garden,
C Delhi. It has not been alleged that the appellant's wife has an
independent source of income by doing some business or by
some service etc. In these circumstances, it can be inferred
that the payment of the bill of the telephone line in the name of
the appellant's wife was being made by the appellant himself,
D since his wife has no independent source of income and is
economically dependent on him.
11. In our opinion, we have to draw a distinction between
the cases where a relative who though living in the same house
has an independent source of income, and cases where one
E relative is dependent on another. While in the former case if
there are two different lines, one in the name of the relative who
is economically independent and has his own source of income
and the other in the name of the petitioner, it could be held that
non-payment of dues by the relative cannot lead to the
F consequence of the disconnection of the telephone line of the
petitioner. However, in the latter category of cases i.e. where
one relative is economically dependent on another, the position,
in our opinion, is wholly different. For instance, if there is a
telephone line in the name of a minor child of a father, and another
G telephone line in the name of the father, and both of them are
living together in the same house, then obviously the telephone
bills of the telephone line in the name of the minor child is being
paid by the father. Hence, in our opinion, for non-payment of the
bills of the telephone line in the name of the minor child, the
H telephone line of the father can be disconnected.
SURJIT SINGH v. MAHANAGAR TELEPHONE 691
NIGAM LTD. [MARKANDEY KAT JU, J.]
~
12. Similarly, there can be a case where the husband and A
wife are living in the same house and both have independent
• sources of income, and the wife herself is paying for the bills in
connection with the telephone line in her own name, whereas
the husband is paying for the bills of his own telephone line. In
such a case, for non-payment of the bill of the wife the telephone B
t
line of the husband cannot be disconnected.
13. As stated above, in the judgment of the learned Single
Judge of the Bombay High Court, it is not mentioned that the
father was economically dependent on the petitioner. Hence,
the aforesaid decision can be of no help in deciding the present c
dispute, since necessary factual details are lacking.
14. Learned counsel for the appellant then invited our
attention to the decision of a learned Single Judge oftheAndhra
Pradesh High Court in Y Pridhvi Kumar vs. The General
D
Manager, Telecom District, Hyderabad AIR 1993 AP 131. We
" have carefully perused the said decision and find that that
decision is also distinguishable. In the said decision it appears
that there was a telephone line in the name of the mother and
another telephone line in the name of the son, and both were
living together. There were dues in the name of the mother and E
it was held by the Andhra Pradesh High Court that in that situation
the liability could not be fastened on the son and his telephone
line could not be disconnected. It is not clear from the aforesaid
decision of the Andhra Pradesh High Court whether the mother
)'.
was economically dependent on her son. It is quite possible F
that the mother was economically dependent on her husband
who was paying her bills. It is also possible that the mother was
a working woman with an independent source of income. Hence,
the appellant in the present case cannot derive any benefit from
the aforesaid decision of the Andhra Pradesh High Court. G
15. Learned counsel for the appellant also sought to rely
~
on the decision in Santokh Singh vs. Divisional Engineer,
Telephones, Shillong and others AIR 1990 Gauhati 47.
However, it appears that an appeal was filed against the
H
692 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (2008] 6 S.C.R.
A aforesaid judgment in this Court being Civil Appeal No. 2849/
1991 titled Divisional Engineer Telephone & Ors. vs. Sardar
Santokh Singh decided on 22.4.2001 by this Court. In the said
decision it was held that the judgment of the Gauhati High Court
in Santokh Singh vs. Divisional Engineer Telephone & Ors
B shall not be treated as a precedent.
16. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent
has relied on the decision of a Division Bench of the Delhi High
Court in Madan Taya/ & Pran Kr. Tayal vs. MTNL 1989 (16)
DRJ 51, the decision of a learned Single Judge of the Delhi
C High Court in Rajiv Gosain vs. MTNL in Civil Writ Petition No.
6343/1981 decided on 20.4.2000, and the decision of a learned
Single Judge of Delhi High Court in Sukh Dayal Narula vs.
MTNL in Civil Writ Petition No. 1693/1996 decided on
26.9.1997. In these decisions the Delhi High Court has held
D that the telephone line of a subscriber can be disconnected for
non-payment of dues of a relative who is living in the same
premises. Learned counsel also relied on the decision of the
Gujarat High Court in lndravadan Pranla/ Shah vs. General
Manager, Ahmedabad Telephones District Kharpur,
E Ahmedabad & Anr. AIR 1990 Guj 85 in which it was held that
the telephone of the petitioner can be disconnected if there is
failure by the firm in which he is a partner to pay the dues of the
telephone line in the name of the firm.
17. Learned counsel for the appellant has invited our
F attention to Rule 2(pp) of the Indian Telegraph Rules, 1951 which
defines a 'subscriber' as follows:
....
" 'Subscriber' means a person to whom a telephone
service has been provided by means of an installation
under these rules or under an agreement".
G
18. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that in view
of the definition of subscriber in Rule 2(pp}, the teiephone lines
in the name of the appellant could not have been disconnected
for c1efault in the payment of dues in connection with the telephone
H line in the name of his wife.
SURJIT SINGH v. MAHANAGAR TELEPHONE 693
NIGAM LTD. [MARKANDEY KAT JU, J.]
' 19. We have already stated above that where two relatives A
are living in the same house a distinction has to be drawn
between a telephone line in the name of a person who is
economically dependent on another (who may be the husband,
father etc.), and the telephone line in the name of a person who
has an independent source of income from which he is paying B
the telephone bills. In the case of the former, i.e. a person who
is economically dependent on another who is paying his
telephone bills, the telephone line in the name of such other
relative on whom the subscriber is dependent can be
disconnected for non-payment of the telephone bills of the c
nominal subscriber.
20. Learned counsel for the appellant protested that such
an interpretation would be in the teeth of the language used in
Rule 443 read with Rule 2(pp) of the Indian Telegrap·h Rules.
D
21. It is true that on a literal interpretation of Rule 443, we
"· would have to accept the contention of learned counsel for the
appellant. However, in our opinion, in this case, the literal rule
has not to be adopted, because we have also to see the intention
of the rule. The intention obviously was that payment of telephone
dues should be made promptly, otherwise the telephone E
department will suffer. We have, therefore, to take an
interpretation which effectuates and furthers the intention of Rule
443, i.e. the telephone bills should be paid in time.
22. In the case of a wife who is a housewife and is F
economically dependent on her husband, obvious.ly the
"· telephone bills in connection with the line in her name are being
paid by her husband and not by herself. Hence, we have to adopt
a purposive construction in this case and not go by the literal
rule of interpretation.
G
23. Though, no doubt, ordinarily the literal rule should be
applied while interpreting a statute or statutory rule, but the literal
~
rule is not always the only rule of interpretation of a provision in
a statute, and in exceptional cases the literal rule can be
departed from. As observed in th.e Constitution Bench decision H
694 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2008] 6 S.C.R.
•
A of this Court in R.L. Arora vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and others
1964 (6) SCR 784:
"Further, a literal interpretation is not always the only
interpretation of a provision in a statute, and the court has
to lo~k at the setting in which the words are used and the
B circumstances in which the law came to be passed to
decide whether there is something implicit behind the
words actually used which would control the literal meaning
of the words used in a provision of the statute. It is
permissible to control the wide language used in a statute
c if that is possible by the setting in which the words are
used and the intention of the /aw-making body which
may be apparent from the circumstances in which the
particular provision came to be made."
(emphasis supplied)
D
24. Hence it follows that to interpret a statute one has to
sometimes consider the context in which it has been made and
the purpose and object which it seeks to achieve. A too literal
interpretation may sometimes frustrate the very object of the
E statute, and such an approach should be eschewed by the Court.
25. In Hindustan Lever Ltd. vs. Ashok Vishnu Kate and
others 1995(6) SCC 326 (vide para 42) this Court observed:
"Francis Bennion in his Statutory Interpretation Second
F Eon., has dealt with the Functional Construction Rule in
Part XV of his book. The nature of purposive construction ,A
is dealt with in Part XX at p. 659 thus:
"A purposive construction of an enactment is one which
gives effect to the legislative purpose by-
G
(a) following the literal meaning of the enactment where
that meaning is in accordance with the legislative purpose
(in this Code called a purposive-and-literal construction),
or
H (b) applying a strained meaning where the literal meaning
SURJIT SINGH v. MAHANAGAR TELEPHONE 695
NIGAM LTD. [MARKANDEY KAT JU, J.]
is not in accordance with the legislative purpose (in the A
Code called a purposive and strained construction)."
At p. 661 of the same book, the author has considered the
topic of "Purposive Construction" in contrast with literal
construction. The learned author has observed as under:
B
"Contrast with literal construction - Although the term
'purposive construction' is not new, its entry into fashion
betokens a swing by the appellate courts away from literal
construction. Lord Diplock said in 1975: 'If one looks back
to the actual decisions of the [House of Lords] on questions C
of statutory construction over the last 30 years one cannot
fail to be struck by the evidence of a trend away from the
purely literal towards the purposive construction of
statutory provisions'. The matter was summed up by Lord
Diplock in this way -
D
I am not reluctant to adopt a purposive construction where
to apply the literal meaning of the legislative language
used would lead to results which would clearly defeat the
purposes of the Act. But in doing so the task on which a
court of justice is engaged remains one of construction, E
even where this involves reading into the Act words which·
are not expressly included in it."
(emphasis supplied)
We respectfully agree with the view expressed above.
~·
26. In our opinion, in this case, a purposive construction F
has to be adopted in interpreting Rule 443 of the Indian Telegraph
Rules.
27. We may also consider the matter from the point of view
of our traditional principles of interpretation. The great Sanskrit G
grammarian Nagesh Bhatt in his book 'Param Laghu Manjusha'
._has said that a word or phrase can have three meanings:
"(i) Abhidha i.e. literal meaning; (ii) Lakshana i.e. the
indicative or suggestive meaning; (iii) Vyanjana i.e. the
figurative meaning. H
696 SUPREME COURT REPORTS . [2008) 6 $.C.R.
A Usually the literal meaning is followed, but some times the
suggestive or figurative meanings are adopted. As regards
the suggestive meaning (Lakshana) the oft quoted example
is 'JfJi141'{ tWsr' : i.e. "I live on the Ganges." This sentence
cannot be literally interpreted because no one can live on
B the surface of the Ganges river. Hence it has to be
interpreted to mean "I live on the bank of the Ganga river."
As regards the third meaning Vyanjana, the oft quoted
example is 'mU ~·which means: "The sun has set."
c Here the real meaning has in fact nothing to do with the
sun or its setting, but it really means "light the lamp" or "let
us go home" (because the sun has set).
28. In our opinion, in the present case, we have to adopt
the L.akshana (or Unga) rule of interpretation rather than the
D Shruti or Abidha (the literal) rule. In other words, Rule 443 of the
Indian Telegraph Rule has to be interpreted in a purposive sense.
Hence the telephone line in the name of the person who is really
payi~e bills in connection with the telephone line in the name
of another person Wfto ·is economically dependent on the former
E can ~ diSConnected for non payment of bills in connection with
tne telephone line in the name of the latter. Such an interpretation
would effectuate the intention of Rule 443, which is that telephone
bills should be paid promptly.
29. Also, it would make no difference whether the telephone
F line is at the residence or .at the business premises, even if the
two are entirely separate. Hence in our opinion both the
..
telephone lines in the name of the appellant, one at his residence
and the other at his business premises, can be disconnected
for non-payment of the dues in connection with the line in the
G name of his dependent wife.
30. We can also utilize the Mimansa Rules of Interpretation
in interpreting Rule 443.
31. It is deeply regrettable that in our Courts of law, lawyers
H quote Maxwell and Craies but nobody refers to the Mimansa
. SURJIT SINGH v. MAHANAGAR TELEPHONE 697
· NIGAM LTD. [MARKANDEYKA!JU, J.] ·
Principles of Interpretation. Today our so-called educated people A
are largely unaware about the great intellectual achievements
of our ancestors and the intellectual treasury they have
bequeathed us. The Mimans~ Principles of Interpretation is part
of that intellectual treasury, but it is distressing to note that apart
a
from reference to these principles in the judgmentof Sir John B .
Edge, the then Chief Justice of Allahabad High Court, in Beni
Prasad v. Hardai Devi (1892) ILR 14,A.1167 (FB), there has been
...
almost no utilization of these principles even in our own country
(except by one of us, M. Katju, J.).
32. It may be mentioned that the Mimansa Rules· bt C
Interpretation were our traditional principles of interpretation
used for over two and a half thousand years, laid down by Jaimini '
whose Sutras were explained by Shabar, Kumarila Bhatta,
Prabhakar, etc. These Mimansa Principles were regularly used
by our great jurists like Vijnaneshwara (Author of Mitakshara), o
Jimutvahana (author of Dayabhaga), Nanda Pandit, etc.
whenever they found any conflict between the various Smritis or
any ambiguity or incongruity therein. There is no reason why we
cannot use these principles on appropriate occasions. However, ·..•
it is a matter of deep regret that these principles have rarely · E ...
been used in our law Courts. It is nowhere mentioned in our
Constitution or any other iaw that only Maxwell's Principles of .
Interpretation can qe used by the Court. We can use any system
of interpretation which helps us solve a difficulty. In certain
situations Maxwell's principles would be more appropriate, while
in other situations the Mimansa principles may be more suitable. F
33. The books on Mimansa are almost all in Sanskrit, but
there is one good book called the 'Miman.sa R.ules of
Interpretation' by Prof. K.L. Sarkar published in the Tagore Law
Lecture Series, which may be seen. ·
G
34. It may be mentioned that the Mimansa Rules of
Interpretation were created for resolving the prl3Cfical difficlties
in performing the Vedic yagyas. The rules for performing ·the
various yagyas were given in books called Brahmanas .e.g ..
Shatapath Brahman, Aitareya Brahman, Taitereya Brahman, etc.. H
., ..
698 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2008] 6 S.C.R.
A There were many ambiguities, conflicts, incongruities, ellipses
etc. in the Brahmana texts, and hence principles of interpretation
had to be created for this purpose. Thus the Mimansa principles
were originally created for religious purposes, but they were so
rational and logical that subsequently they began to be used in
B law, grammar, logic, philosophy etc., that is, they became of
universal application.
35. Jaimini in Sutra 6: 3: 9 states:
"When there is a conflict between the purpose and the
c material, the purpose is to prevail, because in the absence
of the prescribed material a substitute can be used, for
the material is subordinate to the purpose".
36. To explain this it may be mentioned that the Brahmanas
state that the prescribed Yupa (sacrificial post for tying the
D sacrificial animal) must be made of Khadir Wood. However,
Khadir wood is weak while the animal tied may be restive.
Hence, the Mimansa principle (stated above) permits that the
Yupa can be made of Khadar wood which is strong. Now this
substitution is being made despite the fact that the prescribed
E wood is Khadir, but this prescription is only subordinate or
accessory to the performance of the yagya, which is the main
object. Hence, if it comes in the way of the yagya being
performed, it can be modified or substituted.
37. In this connection we may also refer to the Wooden
F Sword Maxim (Sphadi Nyaya), which is a well known Maxim in
the Mimansa system. This Maxim states "what is prescribed as
a means to an action, is to be taken in a sense suited to the
performance of the action" (vide Jaimini 3:1:2, quoted in the
book 'Mimansa Rules of Interpretation' by K.L. Sarkar at p. 185).
G The word ' Spha' in Sanskrit means a sword, which is normally
a metallic object for cutting. However, 'Spha' in connection with
a Yagya has to be interpreted as a wooden sword, because in
;.
a Yagya a small wooden sword called 'Spha' is used which is a
pushing instrument (as a Yagya requires no cutting instrument,
H but only a pushing instrument). Thus, 'Sphadi Nyaya' implies
SURJIT SINGH v. MAHANAGAR TELEPHONE 699
NIGAM LTD. [MARKANDEY KAT JU, J.]
~
that we have to see the object of the text to correctly interpret it. A
38. In the Mimansa system, the literal rule of interpretation
is called the Shruti (or Abhida) principle, and ordinarily it is this
principle which is to be applied when interpreting a text.
However, there are exceptional situations when we have to
depart from the literal rule and then certain other principles have B
to be resorted to e.g. (1) the Unga (also called Lakshana)
principle or the suggestive power of words or expressions, (2)
the Vakya principle or syntactical arrngement, (3) the Prakarana
principle, which permits construction by referring to other texts
in order to make the meaning clear, (4) the Sthana (position) c
principle which means the relative position of one text with
reference to another, (5) the Samakhya (name) principle which
means the connection between different passages by the
indication accorded by the derivative words of a compound
name. D
'l'
39. In the present case we are of the opinion that the Unga
(Lakshana) principle will apply.
40. Unga really means interpretation by understanding the
context, and it is a departure from the literal rule of interpretation. E
41. The Unga principle can be illustrated by the decision
of this Court in UP. Bhoodan Yagna Samiti vs. Brij Kishore
AIR 1988 SC 2239 where the words 'landless person' were
held to mean 'landless peasant' and not landless businessmen.
F
~- 42. Here we.see that the Court has departed from the literal
rule of interpretation, because by the literal rule even a very rich
businessman who owns no land will be regarded as a landless
person. Since the object of the U.P. Bhoodan Act was to give
some land to the landless peasants, the expression 'landless
G
person' was interpreted to mean 'landless peasant' only. This
interpretation was necessary otherwise the entire object of the
U.P. Bhoodan Act would be frustrated and land donated for
distribution to landless peasants could be grabbed by rich
businessmen on the ground that they owned no land, although
H
700 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2008] 6 S.C.R.
A they may have huge amount of wealth in the form of shares in
their companies, securities, crores of rupees in banks etc ..
43. We may also like to point out that there is a difference
between Linga (lakshana) principle and the Vakya principle. In
the former no violence is done to the wording of the text, but the
8 words or expressions are construed differently from the literal
sense, and hence Linga is really construction by context. In
Vakya, however, some violence is done to the text, e.g. by
connecting two separate sentences, or by adding words or
expressions, or by transferring words or expressions up or down
C a sentence. This violence may sometimes become necessary
to save the text from becoming meaningless or absurd, just as
the surgeon may have to do violence to the body (by operation)
to save the patient's life. For this purpose the Uha principle is
utilized (The Uha principle or use of reason, is generally applied
D for construction of texts). In this connection it may be mentioned
that Maxwell also permits doing violence to the statute in
exceptional situations. He says "Where the language of a statute,
in its ordinary meaning and grammatical construction leads to
a manifest contradiction of the apparent purpose of the
E enactment, or to some inconvenience or absurdity, hardship or
injustice, presumably not intended, a construction may be put
upon it which modifies the meaning of the words, and even the
structure of the sentence. This may be done by departing from
the rules of grammar, by giving an unusual meaning to particular
F words, by altering their collocation, by rejecting them altogether,
or by interpolating other words, under the influence, no doubt, of
an irresistible conviction that the legislature could not possibly
have intended what the words signify, and that the modifications
thus made are mere corrections of careless language and really
G give the true intention''. Thus, in S.S. Kalra vs. Union of India
1991 (2) sec 87 this Court observed that sometimes courts
can supply words which have been accidentally omitted. (See
also the rulings mentioned in G.P. Singh's book "Principles of
Statutory Interpretation" 9th Edition, 2004 pages 70 to 77).
H 44. The principle of Linga is illustrated by Jaimini in
SURJIT SINGH v. MAHANAGAR TELEPHONE 701
NIGAM LTD. [MARKANDEY KATJU, J.]
numerous Sutras and Adhikarnas. Thus the Pranabhrit A
Adhikarana which is based on Jaimini's Sutra 28, Chapter IV,
Book 1 shows how words acquired a wider meaning by the
Linga or Lakshana process.
45. In the Taittiriya Samhita (5.3.1.2) there is a passage : B
"He disposes the Pranabhrit - ~ J"lcWIRI"
46. Again in the same Samhita (5.7.2.5) there is a similar
passage:
"He disposes the Ajyani - 311\TlllofRdl \3"lC:{llR1" c
47. Now what is the meaning of Pranabhrit in the one case
and of Ajyani in the other? The words Pranabhrit and Ajyani are
respectively the names of two Mantras or verses which begin
with those words. These verses are used in consecrating bricks 0
required for a certain purpose in a yagya. From this fact the
bricks consecrated by the Pranabhrit Mantra acquired the name
of Pranabhrit. Similarly the bricks consecrated by the Ajyani
Mantra acquired the name of Ajyani. But in course of time the
whole heap of bricks of a particular kind came to be called E
Pranabhrit, because one or two bricks of that heap were
consecrated as Pranabhrit bricks. Thus the instance of
Pranabhrit becomes a maxim for extending the scope of a name
in the above manner. In fact, the meaning of the words Pranabhrit
and Ajyani in these cases is determined by the peculiar
association of the words and by the context of the passages in F
which they are used. Such a use is called Lingasamabaya
(embodiment of the Linga).
48. Nanda Pandit, in his work 'Dattaka Mimansa', refers
to the Pranabhrit maxim to show that although the word G
·substitute' was at first applied in express term only to six
descriptions of sons, later the word by general use became
applicable to all the twelve descriptions.
49. The Pranabhrit maxim~~ states :
H
702 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [200816 S.C.R.
A "The peculiar feature of one leading object belonging to a
class may give name to the whole class."
50. Pranabhrit literally means filling with life or inspiring
life; but the expression forms the commencement of a Mantra
which is used in consecrating certain bricks. Hence the word
B
has come to mean a kind of bricks (ITT"1ll'l~~IG>C:l1i
~ ). This is the way in which the word Ajyani also
has come to mean another class of bricks.
51. The Pranabhrit maxim applies in the present case also
C because we have to fill life (i.e. given an appfopriate
interpretation) to the word 'subscriber' in Rule 443 of the Indian
Telegraph Rules.
52. The Pranabhrit maxim is often used in the interpretation
0 of a text by treating it as illustrative and not exhaustive. The
illustrative rule of interpretation is a departure from the literal
rule which normally has to be adopted while construing a text.
However, sometimes departures from the literal rule are
permissible, and one of such departures Is the Illustrative rule.
E To give an example, in Sanskrit there is an oft-quoted statement
"Kakebhyo Dadhi Rakshitam" which means "protect the curd
from the crows". Now in this sentence the word 'crow' is merely
illustrative and not exhaustive. The statement does not mean
that one should protect the curd only from crows but allow it to
be eaten up by cats, dogs or to get damaged by dirt or filth etc.
F It really means that one should protect the curd from all dangers.
Hence the word 'crow' in the above statement is only illustrative
and not exhaustive.
53. We can take another example. In the U.S. Constitution,
G Article 1 Section 8 states that Congress (the American
Parliament) can raise Armies and Navies. There Is no mention
of an Air Force there, obviously because there were no aircraft
in 1791 when the U.S. Constitution was promulgated. The first
aircraft was invented by the Wright brothers in 1903. However,
H today's reality is that a modern Army cannot fight without air
SURJIT SINGH v. MAHANAGAR TELEPHONE 703
NIGAM LTD. [MARKANDEY KATJU, J.]
1
cover. Amendment to the U.S. Constitution is a very ardous and A
lengthy procedure because it requires two-third majority of both
Houses of Congress and ratification by three-fourth of the States.
By the time this is done, the enemy may invade and occupy the
country. Hence the words 'Armies and Navies' have to be
interpreted as illustrative and not exhaustive, and they really B
>
mean all armed forces necessary for the security of the country
:. r
(which would include an Air Force, also).
54. Thus Article 1Section8 of the U.S. Constitution has to
be interpreted not by applying the Shruti rule (literal rule), but by
applying the Unga rule. The words 'Armies and Navies' in Article c
1 Section 8 are to be construed not literally but as suggestive.
In other words, they are only illustrative, and they really mean all
Armed Forces necessary for the security of the country.
55. We may also refer to Maxwell's 'Interpretation of
D
.., Statutes' where it is stated :
"But it is another elementary rule, that a thing which is
within the letter of a statute is not within the statute unless
it be also within the real intention of the Legislature, 'and
the words, if sufficiently flexible, must be construed in the E
sense which, if less correct grammatically, is more in
harmony within that intention. Language is rarely so free
from ambiguity as to be incapable of being used in more
than one sense; and to adhere rigidly to its literal and
primary meaning in all cases would be to miss its real F
meaning in many. If a literal meaning had been given to
the laws which forbade a layman to "lay hands" on a priest,
and punished all who drew blood in the street, the layman
who wounded a priest with a weapon would not have fallen
within the prohibition, and the surgeon who bled a person
G
to save his life, would have been liable to punishment. On
a literal construction of his promise, Mohammed 11.'s
~ sawing the Venetian Governor's body in two, was no
breach of his engagement to spare his head; nor
Tamerlane's burying alive a garrison, a violation of his
H
704 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2008] 6 S.C.R.
A pledge to shed no blood."
Maxwell also states:
"The words of a statute are to be understood in the sense
in which they best harmonize with the subject of the
B enactment and the object which the Legislature has in
view. Their meaning is found not so much in a strictly
grammatical or etymological propriety of language, nor
even in its popular use, as in the subject or in the occasion
on which they are used and the object to be attained."
C (emphasis supplied)
56. Thus, in both systems of interpretation, the Mimansa
system as well as Maxwell's system, it is emphasized that the
intention of a statute has often to be seen to properly interpret it,
0 and it is not that the Court can never depart from the literal rule
of interpretation. It all depends on the context, the subject-matter,
the purpose for which the provision was made, etc .
. 57. As already stated above, while construing Rule 443
we have to give an interpretation which subserves the intention
E of the Rule which is that telephone bills should be promptly paid,
otherwise the department will be short of the funds needed for
financing the telephone services which are to be rendered to
the consumers. After all, the salary of the employees of the
telephone department have to be paid, the telephone equipment
F has to be maintained, repaired and kept up-to-date. Sometimes
new technology has to be introduced. There may be various
other requirements for which funds may be required, and all these
can only be possible if the telephone bills are paid in time. Hence,
in our opinion, the word 'subscriber' in Rule 2(pp) has to be
G given a wider meaning, as already stated above.
58. In view of the above, we find no merit in this appeal
which is accordingly dismissed. There shall be no order as to
costs.
H S.K.S. Appeal dismissed
Search Indian case law
Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.
Try "telephone line disconnection"Sign in to search