Shri Giri, in addition to the submissions raised by Shri
Cama, on his special facts submitted that it was fallacious to
take into account raw materials that ultimately went into the
manufacturing of the finished products and to state that the said
raw materials being groceries would therefore make the final
product also a “grocery”. He further argued that the expression
“grocery” would only comprise articles which are required as
daily necessities such as oil, grain, etc. in households, and this
not being the case, soft drinks manufactured and bottled water
would be outside the expression “grocery”. He also argued that
when the Act was extended to the appellant company’s factory,
in the year 1983, whatever may be the position today, the
position in 1983 was clear and obviously the items
manufactured by the appellant company would not have fallen
within the expression “grocery” as understood in 1983.
25. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Board has
repelled all these arguments stating that the expression
“grocery” was wide enough to include all items of food and drink
which would necessarily take in the appellant company’s
products. He reiterated his argument on construing a beneficial
enactment such as the 1969 Act to achieve the object set out
and that assuming that the term “grocery” has a narrower
meaning, obviously the broader meaning should be taken into
account. Further, he also stated that whatever the position was
in 1983, at the stage of the show cause notice in 2005 and by
the date of the State Government order in 2008 both soft drinks
manufactured as well as bottled water manufactured by the
appellant company were certainly household items among the
middle class and rich sections of society.
26. The definition of “grocery” contained in the Oxford
Advanced Learner’s Dictionary of Current English, 9th Edition, is
as follows:-
“grocery – (grocery store) a shop/store that sells
food and other things used in the home. In
American English ‘grocery store’ is often used to
mean supermarket. 2. Groceries – food and other
goods sold by a grocer or at a supermarket.”
We also find a useful definition contained in Collins English
Dictionary, Third Edition –
“groceries – merchandise, esp. Foodstuffs, sold by a
grocer”.
27. That the expression “grocery” in 2005, when the Act was
sought to be applied to the appellant company, would include
soft drinks manufactured by the appellant company and bottled
water as daily household goods among the middle class and
rich sections of society, was not seriously contested by Shri
Giri. The argument that we should find the meaning of the
expression “grocery” on the date on which the Act was
extended to the area in which the appellant company’s factory
was situate is fallacious in law. This Court in The Senior
Electric Inspector and others v. Laxmi Narayan Chopra and
others, 1962 (3) S.C.R. 146, when confronted with a similar
argument to that made by Shri Giri, repelled the said argument
in the following terms:
“The legal position may be summarized thus: The
maxim contemporanea expositio as laid down by
Coke was applied to construing ancient statutes but
not to interpreting Acts which are comparatively
modern. There is a good reason for this change in
the mode of interpretation. The fundamental rule of
construction is the same whether the Court is asked
to construe a provision of an ancient statute or that
of a modern one, namely, what is the expressed
intention of the Legislature. It is perhaps difficult to
attribute to a legislative body functioning in a static
society that its intention was couched in terms of
considerable breadth so as to take within its sweep
the future developments comprehended by the
phraseology used. It is more reasonable to confine
its intention only to the circumstances obtaining at
the time the law was made. But in a modern
progressive society it would be unreasonable to
confine the intention of a Legislature to the meaning
attributable to the word used at the time the law was
made, for a modern Legislature making laws to
govern a society which is fast moving must be
presumed to be aware of an enlarged meaning the
same concept might attract with the march of time
and with the revolutionary changes brought about in
social, economic, political and scientific and other
fields of human activity. Indeed, unless a contrary
intention appears, an interpretation should be given
to the words used to take in new facts and
situations, if the words are capable of
Cama, on his special facts submitted that it was fallacious to
take into account raw materials that ultimately went into the
manufacturing of the finished products and to state that the said
raw materials being groceries would therefore make the final
product also a “grocery”. He further argued that the expression
“grocery” would only comprise articles which are required as
daily necessities such as oil, grain, etc. in households, and this
not being the case, soft drinks manufactured and bottled water
would be outside the expression “grocery”. He also argued that
when the Act was extended to the appellant company’s factory,
in the year 1983, whatever may be the position today, the
position in 1983 was clear and obviously the items
manufactured by the appellant company would not have fallen
within the expression “grocery” as understood in 1983.
25. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Board has
repelled all these arguments stating that the expression
“grocery” was wide enough to include all items of food and drink
which would necessarily take in the appellant company’s
products. He reiterated his argument on construing a beneficial
enactment such as the 1969 Act to achieve the object set out
and that assuming that the term “grocery” has a narrower
meaning, obviously the broader meaning should be taken into
account. Further, he also stated that whatever the position was
in 1983, at the stage of the show cause notice in 2005 and by
the date of the State Government order in 2008 both soft drinks
manufactured as well as bottled water manufactured by the
appellant company were certainly household items among the
middle class and rich sections of society.
26. The definition of “grocery” contained in the Oxford
Advanced Learner’s Dictionary of Current English, 9th Edition, is
as follows:-
“grocery – (grocery store) a shop/store that sells
food and other things used in the home. In
American English ‘grocery store’ is often used to
mean supermarket. 2. Groceries – food and other
goods sold by a grocer or at a supermarket.”
We also find a useful definition contained in Collins English
Dictionary, Third Edition –
“groceries – merchandise, esp. Foodstuffs, sold by a
grocer”.
27. That the expression “grocery” in 2005, when the Act was
sought to be applied to the appellant company, would include
soft drinks manufactured by the appellant company and bottled
water as daily household goods among the middle class and
rich sections of society, was not seriously contested by Shri
Giri. The argument that we should find the meaning of the
expression “grocery” on the date on which the Act was
extended to the area in which the appellant company’s factory
was situate is fallacious in law. This Court in The Senior
Electric Inspector and others v. Laxmi Narayan Chopra and
others, 1962 (3) S.C.R. 146, when confronted with a similar
argument to that made by Shri Giri, repelled the said argument
in the following terms:
“The legal position may be summarized thus: The
maxim contemporanea expositio as laid down by
Coke was applied to construing ancient statutes but
not to interpreting Acts which are comparatively
modern. There is a good reason for this change in
the mode of interpretation. The fundamental rule of
construction is the same whether the Court is asked
to construe a provision of an ancient statute or that
of a modern one, namely, what is the expressed
intention of the Legislature. It is perhaps difficult to
attribute to a legislative body functioning in a static
society that its intention was couched in terms of
considerable breadth so as to take within its sweep
the future developments comprehended by the
phraseology used. It is more reasonable to confine
its intention only to the circumstances obtaining at
the time the law was made. But in a modern
progressive society it would be unreasonable to
confine the intention of a Legislature to the meaning
attributable to the word used at the time the law was
made, for a modern Legislature making laws to
govern a society which is fast moving must be
presumed to be aware of an enlarged meaning the
same concept might attract with the march of time
and with the revolutionary changes brought about in
social, economic, political and scientific and other
fields of human activity. Indeed, unless a contrary
intention appears, an interpretation should be given
to the words used to take in new facts and
situations, if the words are capable of
comprehending them.
REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO.9999 OF 2010
PEPSICO INDIA HOLDING P. LTD.
V
GROCERY MARKET & SHOPS BOARD
& ORS.
Dated;February 12, 2016.
Citation;(2016) 4 SCC493
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO.9999 OF 2010
PEPSICO INDIA HOLDING P. LTD.
V
GROCERY MARKET & SHOPS BOARD
& ORS.
Dated;February 12, 2016.
Citation;(2016) 4 SCC493
R.F. Nariman, J.
