Menon v. State of Bombay, [1951] S.C.R.
228, Kay v. Goodwin, (1830) 6 Bing. 576, Surtees v. Ellison ... matter of
controversy. Tindak C.J. stated this in Kay v. Goodwin(1):
"I take the effect of repealing a statute
states the exception more widely. He says (in Kay v.
Goodwin)(1): ,, The effect of repealing a statute is to
obliterate it as completely from ... based on a statement of Tindal C.J. in Kay v. Goodwin(1).
The learned Chief Justice made the following observations
:--
"I take
never existed. (Per Tindal,
C.J., in Kay v. Goodwin and Lord Tenterdon in
Surtees v. Ellison cited with approval in State of
Orissa
matter of controversy.
Tindal, C.J., stated this in Kay v. Goodwin (1830) 6 Bing 576 at p. 582.
"I take the effect
reflected from the following two English cases.
In Kay vs. Goodwin reported in (1830) 6 Bing. 576
= English Reports (Volume 130) at page 1403, Tindal
existing law -- per
Tyndall C. J. in 'Kay v. Goodwin, (1830) 130
ER 1403 (E).
In England the practice was to Insert in most
made and completed when the offence is existing: see Kay v. Goodwin, (1830) 6 Beng 476, 582 (E).
But the canon of construction that operates
very forceful language by Tindal C. J. in 'Kay v. Goodwin' (1830) 6 Bing 576 (B), where he said:
I take the effect ... Common Law, which Tindal G. J., had enunciated in 'Kay v. Goodwin (B)', already referred to. It is now abundantly clear that
never been passed. Tindal, C. J., in Kay v. Goodwin, (1830) 6 Bing 576, stated thus,
"I take the effect of repealing a statute
Committee quote from the decision of Tindal, C.J., in Kay v. Goodwin (1830) 6 Bing. 576 : 130 E.R. 1403, as follows:
I take
