Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

1960 (2) TMI 32

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... es Act puts an end to the notification giving power to the District Judge, Poona, to hear the application under section 153-C of the Act of 1913 as that notification is inconsistent with section 10 of the Act of 1956 and the District Judge cannot, therefore, continue to deal with the application.Section 24, therefore, does not cancel the notification empowering the District Judge of Poona to exercise jurisdiction under the Act of 1913. It seems to us that since under section 6 of the General Clauses Act the proceeding in respect of the application under section 153-C of the Act of 1913 may be continued after the repeal of that Act, it follows that the District Judge of Poona continues to have jurisdiction to entertain it. If it were not so, .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... District Judge of Poona dismissed this application. The appellant's appeal to the High Court of Bombay against this dismissal also failed. Hence the present appeal. Section 644 of the Act of 1956 repeals the Act of 1913 and certain other legislation relating to companies. Sections 645 to 657 of the Act of 1956 contain various saving provisions. Mr. Banaji appearing for the appellant contended that the proceeding before the District Judge of Poona under section 153-C of the Act of 1913 had not been saved by any of these provisions. We do not consider it necessary to pronounce on this question for it seems to us clear that that proceeding can be continued in spite of the repeal of the Act of 1913 in view of section 6 of the General Clauses .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... has been held by this court in State of Punjab v. Mohar Singh [1955] 1 SCR 893, 900 that section 6 applies even where the repealing Act contains fresh legislation on the same subject but in such a case one would have to look to the provisions of the new Act for the purpose of determining whether they indicate a different intention. The Act of 1956 not only repeals the Act of 1913 but contains other fresh legislation on the matters enacted by the Act of 1913. It was further observed in State of Punjab v. Mohar Singh case ( supra ) , that in trying to ascertain whether there is a contrary intention in the new legislation : "The line of enquiry would be, not whether the new Act expressly keeps alive old rights and liabilities but/ .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... on 647 is to be understood as indicating an intention that section 6 of the General Clauses Act is not to apply. On the other hand, the parties are agreed that the provisions of section 153-C of the Act of 1913 have been substantially re-enacted by the Act of 1956 and this would indicate an intention not to destroy the rights created by section 153-C. Mr. Banaji then drew our attention to section 10 of the Act of 1956 and section 24 of the General Clauses Act. Section 10 of the Act of 1956 corresponds to section 3 of the Act of 1913, and deals with the jurisdiction of courts. Under section 10 the Central Government may empower a District Court to exercise jurisdiction under the Act, not being the jurisdiction conferred among others by sec .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... istrict Judge of Poona to deal with the application would be inconsistent in this respect with the provisions of the Act of 1956 and could not in view of section 24 of the General Clauses Act be deemed to continue in force after the repeal of the Act of 1913. Hence it is contended that the notification has ceased to have any force and the District Judge of Poona has no longer any jurisdiction to hear the application. It is also said that this shows that the Act of 1956 indicates that the rights acquired under the Act of 1913 would come to an end on its repeal. We are unable to accept these contentions. Section 10 of the Act of 1956 deals only with the jurisdiction of courts. It shows that the District Courts can no longer be empowered to .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates