<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Lawmatters.in &#187; Interpretation</title>
	<atom:link href="http://lawmatters.in/content/category/interpretation/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://lawmatters.in</link>
	<description>Things that matter in law and more</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 27 Apr 2012 19:25:51 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Otherwise</title>
		<link>http://lawmatters.in/content/otherwise-418</link>
		<comments>http://lawmatters.in/content/otherwise-418#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 May 2008 02:44:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Law Matters</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Interpretation]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lawmatters.in/content/otherwise-418.html</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&#8220;The Advanced Law Lexicon defines â€˜otherwiseâ€™ as: â€˜By other like means; contrarily; different from that to which it relates; in a different manner; in another way; in any other way; differently in other respects in different respects; in some other &#8230; <a href="http://lawmatters.in/content/otherwise-418">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://lawmatters.in/content/otherwise-418/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Fringe Benefit Tax</title>
		<link>http://lawmatters.in/content/fringe-benefit-tax-417</link>
		<comments>http://lawmatters.in/content/fringe-benefit-tax-417#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 May 2008 02:38:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Law Matters</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Cases]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Interpretation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Legal Provisions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Supreme Court of India]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Taxation]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lawmatters.in/content/fringe-benefit-tax-417.html</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Fringe Benefit Tax was introduced by the Finance Act, 2005 and came into effect on April 1, 2006. As its name suggests, it is levied on fringe benefits which some employees receive. In the case of R &#38; B Falcon &#8230; <a href="http://lawmatters.in/content/fringe-benefit-tax-417">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://lawmatters.in/content/fringe-benefit-tax-417/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Executive Construction</title>
		<link>http://lawmatters.in/content/executive-construction-416</link>
		<comments>http://lawmatters.in/content/executive-construction-416#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 May 2008 02:33:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Law Matters</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Interpretation]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lawmatters.in/content/executive-construction-416.html</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The basic premise of the interpretation of statutes is that sentia legis should be given effect to. One of the ways in which it is ensured that this is done is by placing great value on the interpretations of the &#8230; <a href="http://lawmatters.in/content/executive-construction-416">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://lawmatters.in/content/executive-construction-416/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Falsus in Uno, Falsus in Omnibus</title>
		<link>http://lawmatters.in/content/falsus-in-uno-falsus-in-omnibus-310</link>
		<comments>http://lawmatters.in/content/falsus-in-uno-falsus-in-omnibus-310#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 21 May 2008 06:48:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Law Matters</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Cases]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Criminal Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Interpretation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Murder]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Supreme Court of India]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lawmatters.in/content/falsus-in-uno-falsus-in-omnibus-310.html</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A Bench of the Supreme Court comprising Justice Arijit Pasayat and Justice P. Sathasivam spoke of the application of the maxim &#8216;falsus in uno falsus in omnibus&#8216; in India in the case of Dalbir Singh v. State of Haryana, 2008 &#8230; <a href="http://lawmatters.in/content/falsus-in-uno-falsus-in-omnibus-310">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://lawmatters.in/content/falsus-in-uno-falsus-in-omnibus-310/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Defining Dowry: Not a Gift to a Baby</title>
		<link>http://lawmatters.in/content/defining-dowry-not-a-gift-to-a-baby-300</link>
		<comments>http://lawmatters.in/content/defining-dowry-not-a-gift-to-a-baby-300#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 May 2008 07:05:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Law Matters</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Cases]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Criminal Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Domestic Violence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Dowry]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Family Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Human Rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Interpretation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Legal Provisions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Marriage and Divorce]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Supreme Court of India]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lawmatters.in/content/defining-dowry-not-a-gift-to-a-baby-300.html</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 says, â€œDowry means any property or valuable security given or agreed to be given either directly or indirectly by one party to a marriage to the other party to the marriage; or by the parents &#8230; <a href="http://lawmatters.in/content/defining-dowry-not-a-gift-to-a-baby-300">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://lawmatters.in/content/defining-dowry-not-a-gift-to-a-baby-300/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Liberal Construction to Beneficial Statutes</title>
		<link>http://lawmatters.in/content/liberal-construction-to-beneficial-statutes-184</link>
		<comments>http://lawmatters.in/content/liberal-construction-to-beneficial-statutes-184#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 10 May 2008 03:05:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Law Matters</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Cases]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Interpretation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Supreme Court of India]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Torts]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lawmatters.in/content/liberal-construction-to-beneficial-statutes-184.html</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Supreme Court had this to say on the need to interpret social welfare statutes liberally in the case of Union of India v. Prabhakaran Vijaya Kumar &#38; Ors. decided on May 5, 2008. An extract from the judgment follows: &#8230; <a href="http://lawmatters.in/content/liberal-construction-to-beneficial-statutes-184">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://lawmatters.in/content/liberal-construction-to-beneficial-statutes-184/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Compensation by the Railways</title>
		<link>http://lawmatters.in/content/compensation-by-the-railways-181</link>
		<comments>http://lawmatters.in/content/compensation-by-the-railways-181#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 10 May 2008 02:30:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Law Matters</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Cases]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Civil Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Compensation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Injury]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Interpretation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Legal Provisions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Supreme Court of India]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Torts]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lawmatters.in/content/compensation-by-the-railways-181.html</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[CASE NO.: Appeal (civil) 6898 of 2002 Union of India v. Prabhakaran Vijaya Kumar &#038; Ors. DATE OF JUDGMENT: 05/05/2008 BENCH: H. K. Sema &#038; Markandey Katju In an appeal by special leave against a judgment of a Division Bench &#8230; <a href="http://lawmatters.in/content/compensation-by-the-railways-181">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://lawmatters.in/content/compensation-by-the-railways-181/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

