Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 10 (1.04 seconds)
Amar Nath Misra vs Sreenarain Mansingka on 2 May, 1950 cites

Piare Lal vs Emperor on 10 January, 1917

14. It may be pointed out that Section 6(e), General Clauses Act, 1897, is similarly worded & in Piare Dusadh v. Emperor, 1944 F. C. R. 61 at p. 98 : (A.I.R. (31) 1944 F. C. l : 45 Cr.L.J. 413), Spens C. J. held that on the principle embodied in Section 6(e), General Clauses Act, 1897, the effect of the repeal of an enactment on cases pending at the time of the repeal would be that they would continue as if the enactment had not been repealed. But this is subject to the qualification that the repealing enactment contains no "provision or indication to the contrary. I do not find anything in the language of Section 16 of the new Act of 1950 which lends colour to the supposition that the section is intended to have any retrospective operation. On the other hand the words "shall lie to the Cts." & "such suit" indicate that the section is designed to have prospective effect only. The new section specifies in which Cts. future suits will be instituted & tried.
Allahabad High Court Cites 2 - Cited by 19 - Full Document
1