Balmakund vs Firm Pirthiraj Ganesh Das on 21 February, 1950
3. The other point taken up by Mr. Mahanty is that the sale having taken place on 5-5-1947, and the amendment having come into force on 14-5-1947, the sale, which was void on account of non-issue of notice under Order 21, Rule 22 on the legal representative of deceased Golak Chandra in accordance with the provisions of Order 21, Rule 22 (then in force at the time of the sale), cannot be validated by the introduction of the new amendment which is not retrospective. This is one of the common rules of interpretation of statutes that procedural laws are retrospective unless there is contrary intention in the Act itself. No person can have a vested right in a course of procedure and it is an elementary principle that the plaintiff or the defendant has the right to prosecute or defend in the manner prescribed for the time being by or in the Court he sues and if there is an Act which alters the mode of procedure he has no other right than to proceed with the old law. It is to be mentioned here that this petition for setting aside the sale has been filed much after the amendment came into force. Furthermore, on a perusal of the language of the new provision under Order 21, Rule 22A, we are satisfied that it means to apply to sales having taken place prior to the coming into force of the new amendment also. We will, in this connexion, refer to a decision of the Patna High Court reported in -- 'Balmakund v. Firm Pirthiraj Ganesh Das', AIR 1951 Pat 333 (C). The judgment was delivered by Narayan J. On this particular point, however, Imam J. did not like to express any definite opinion, but nevertheless we agree with the reasons given in the judgment of Narayan J. who comes to the conclusion that the provisions of the new amendment are retrospective. He observes that in enacting Sub-rule (3) the Legislature contemplated to explain their intention with regard to the provisions contained in Order 21, Rule 22, which had been the subject matter of interpretation in various cases decided by the High Courts and also by the Judicial Committee.