Rules of interpretation in case of ambiguity
Even earlier the Supreme Court in Karunanidhi v. Union of India , held that by Clause (2) of Article 246, concurrent power is conferred upon both the Union and State Legislatures to legislate with respect to the subjects included in List-Ill. Hence if both the Parliament and a State legislature make laws relating to the same concurrent subject, a question of conflict arises between the two enactments. The conflict is solved by Article 254(1) by providing that in such a case the State Law shall be void to the extent it is repugnant to or inconsistent with the Central Act.
Whenever a statute comes up for consideration, the Judge has to necessarily find out the intention of Parliament when he finds ambiguity. I recall a passage from the book entitled. The Discipline of Law by Lord Denning (Butter Worths) at page-12:
Whenever a statute comes up for consideration it must be remembered that it is not within human powers to foresee the manifold sets of facts which may arise, and, even if it were, it is not possible to provide for them in terms free from all ambiguity. The En
