ISSUE:
Whether a general word should include a specific item even when such specific item is/was separately mentioned?
Whether betel leaves should be considered "vegetables" under the Central Province and Berar Sales Tax Act, 1947?
Whether the legislature wanted to make betel leaves taxable or not?
RULE:
Words not defined in the Act itself and being words of everyday use must be construed in its popular sense, meaning which people conversant with subject matter with which the statute is dealing would attribute to it.
If the legislature has classified two items separately than then it, clearly indicates that they belong to different categories.