TMI Blog1933 (11) TMI 23X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that as the sale of agricultural land was asked, the decree should be transferred to the Collector for execution. This contention was not accepted by the learned Subordinate Judge who held that as the land sought to be sold was not under the cultivation of the judgment-debtor it was not therefore agricultural land and so the decree could not be sent to the Collector for execution. The present appeal has been preferred by the judgment-debtor against the order disallowing his objection. 2. We have heard the learned Counsel on both sides and are of opinion that the objections of the judgment-debtors must prevail. It is true that at the time when the learned Subordinate Judge gave his decision the lafeeat notification on this point had nofc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1st January 1912, the execution of decrees in cases in which a civil Court has ordered any ancestral land situated in the United Provinces of Agra and Oudh or any interest in such land to be sold, shall be transferred to the Collector. 4. The important words in these notifications are, the execution of decrees in case s in which a civil Court has ordered. The learned Counsel for the respondents has contended that in this case it was a. mortgage decree which directed the sale and that they got under that decree a. right of which they cannot be divested by a subsequent notification. The right-which they got under the decree was for sale of the mortgaged property and nothing more. No one disputes that right. The decree-holders have a rig ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ure which are to be applied pari passu with and in immediate sequence to such orders for sale, but which had not come into existence, or rather were not operative, till a date subsequent to the date of the order for sale, could not rightly be applied retrospectively to such orders. 5. The fallacy underlying the arguments of the learned Counsel for the respondents is that he assumes that in the case before us the order for sale was made before the date of the notification. Now, if the order for sale had been made before the date of notification then certainly the notification could not have affected that order of sale according to the view taken in Hafizunnissa v. Mahadeo Prasad (1881) 4 All. 116. Now, what is the date on which the Cour ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt is perfectly right in contending that no statute can be construed to have retrospective effect unless its language makes it clear that the intention was that it should have retrospective effect. But this principle cannot be applied to enactments dealing with procedure which are always retrospective to this extent that | provisions will apply to procceedings} already commenced at the time of their enactment, the reason being that no one can have vested right in forms of procedure. The subject is discussed in Chitale's Civil Procedure Code, Vol. 1, pp. 4 and 5. We are satisfied that the words; in case in which civil Court has ordered in the notification No. 576-1 A-93 of 26th March 1932 applies to all cases where a Court executing a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
