Literal Meaning
" Partnered by Barrister Tahmidur Rahman and Barrister Remura Mahbub, Tahmidur Rahman Remura is considered as one of the best law firms in Bangladesh. As the best law firm in Dhaka, Tahmidur Rahman Remura has developed into one of Bangladesh’s most cutting-edge and modern law firms by fusing its more than five years of legal tradition with cutting-edge global best practices. With offices already established in internationally significant cities, the firm aim to continue our global expansion.
Contact the law firm in Dhaka through:
Email: info@trfirm.com
Phone number: 01847220062 or 01779127165
An absolute judgment or sentence needs no expositor.
Explanation
An absolute sentence or proposition (one that is plain without any scruple without any saving) needs not an expositor. In simple terms clear sense require no explanation. Sentence that is absolute and plain does not need expositor. Expositor is a person or thing which explains about complicated theory or idea.
Origin
Latin
Illustration
If the language of any law is not only plain but admits of its one meaning, the task of interpretation can hardly be said to arise. Thus, it is not allowable; to interpret what has no need of interpretation. Hence, it will consider as Absoluta sententia expositore non indiget.
Case References
New Shorrock Spg. And ors. vs N.U. Raval, Income-Tax Officer, AIR 1959 Bom 477
In this case court mentioned in its judgment that if the language employed gives the rule in words of sufficient clarity and precision, no more requires to be done. Indeed, in such a case the task of interpretation can hardly be said to arise: Absoluta sententia expositor non indiget. The language used by the Legislature best declares its intention and must be accepted as decisive of it.
Martab Ali vs Union Of Bangladesh, AIR 1954 Bom 297
In this case court mentioned in the judgment that In court’s opinion the meaning of the words “loss” and “compensation for the loss, destruction or deterioration of goods” used in Section 77 of The Railways Act 1989, is quite plain and the words admit of only one meaning i.e., Absoluta sententia expositore non indiget.
Mahavirprasad Badridas vs M.S. Yagnik, Second Wealth-Taxon, AIR 1960 Bom 191, 1959 37 ITR 191 Bom
In this case, court mentioned in its judgment that the language of an enactment is plain and clear upon its face and of itself fairly susceptible of one meaning the task of interpretation can hardly be said to have arisen, which clearly shows the presence of Absoluta sententia expositor non indiget.
Edited by Sree Ramya
Approved & Published – Sakshi Raje
