Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 8 of 8 (0.24 seconds)
Shiba Kali Kumar And Ors. vs Chuni Lal Chatterjee on 24 May, 1927 cites

Jotiram Khan vs Jonaki Nath Ghose And Anr. on 8 June, 1914

But it is a well established principle of law that retrospective effect ought not to be given to a statute unless an intention to that effect is expressed in plain and unambiguous language. Then Section 6, General Clauses Act (Act 10 of 1897) lays down that when an Act of the Governor-General in Council repeals any enactment, then unless a different intention appears, the repeal shall not affect any rights acquired under the enactment so repealed. If a repealing Act of the Governor-General in Council cannot extinguish such a right, much less can an amending Act of the Bengal Council, like Act 1 of 1907, unless of course the amending Act is a declaratory Act. But Act 1 of 1907 as has been held in the case of Jotiram Khan v. Jonaki Nath Ghose [1914] 20 C.W.N. 253, is not an Act of a declaratory character. The conclusion, therefore, is that Act 1 of 1907 did not extinguish the rights of a non-occupancy raiyat which had been previously acquired by him.
Calcutta High Court Cites 8 - Cited by 2 - Full Document
1