Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

4. It is stated in a well-known text book, Craies on "Statute Law" at p. 334 that the case of Towler v. Chatterton [1829] 6 Bing. 258 was, amongst other cases, commented upon somewhat adversely by Rolfe, B. in an elaborate judgment in Moon v. Durden [1848] 2 Ex. 33. But notwithstanding these criticizms, Towler v. Chatterton [1829] 6 Bing. 258 was followed in R. v. Leeds Bradford Ry. Co. [1852] 18 Q.B. 343. This observation does not seem to be accurate as would appear from a report of the judgment of Rolfe, B. in the case of Moon v. Durden [1848] 2 Ex. 33. There the learned Baron commented adversely upon two nisi prius decisions which were cited before him in support of the contention that a certain Act as regards wagering contracts should be given retrospective effect. But speaking of the decision in Towler v. Chatterton [1829] 6 Bing. 258 the learned Baron makes the following observations:

7. I have pointed out above from the judgment of Rolfe, B., in Moon v. Burden [1848] 2 Ex. 33 that the learned Baron did not actually disapprove of the law laid down in; Towler v. Chatterton [1829] 6 Bing. 258. I may also state-here in passing that two other learned Barons who constituted the Court of. Exchequer with Rolfe, B, did not say anything with regard to this question. The question, therefore, is whether the Limitation Act of 1908 affected any vested right or it was merely a law affecting procedure. It is clear from the observations of Wright, J., that statutes to limitation cannot be considered as anything else than matters relating to procedure and ordinarily such statutes have their operation from the date fixed an the statutes and governs all matters brought before the Court after the commencement of the operation of the statute. There is, however, one exception which has been pointed out in the case of Gopeshwar Pal v. Jiban Chandra [1914] 41 Cal. 1125, decided by a Special Bench of this Court. There the period of limitation under Schedule 3, Ben. Ten. Act, was amended in such a way as to take away the rights of certain persons to bring a suit within the period of limitation prescribed by the Act before the amendment came into operation. The learned Judges observed as follows: