Amending statute and pending proceedings: omitted provision ceased to apply, so relief under section 28 could not be granted.

An amending statute that expressly makes the law "as amended" applicable to pending suits, appeals and proceedings will govern those pending matters in its revised form, including the omission of a prior provision. The Court applied the ordinary meaning of the proviso to section 1(2) of the Calcutta Thika Tenancy (Amendment) Act, 1953 and held that the omitted section 28 could no longer support relief in an application pending when the amendment commenced. The saving principle in section 8 of the Bengal General Clauses Act could not override the clear contrary intention in the amending statute, and the beneficent character of the legislation did not create ambiguity.

---

---

Issues: Whether an application by a Thika tenant for relief under section 28 of the Calcutta Thika Tenancy Act, 1949, which was pending when the Calcutta Thika Tenancy (Amendment) Act, 1953 came into force, could still be disposed of under section 28 after that section had been omitted.

Analysis: The proviso to section 1(2) of the Amendment Act made the Act, as amended, applicable to all suits, appeals and proceedings pending on the date of commencement of the Ordinance. The language was held to be clear and unambiguous. The Court applied the ordinary grammatical meaning of the words and held that the expression "as amended by this Act" referred to the Act in its new shape, including the omission of section 28. The principle under section 8 of the Bengal General Clauses Act could not override a contrary intention expressed by the amending statute. The fact that the legislation was beneficent did not justify reading ambiguity into language that was otherwise plain.

Conclusion: The pending application under section 28 could not be granted relief after the omission of that section, and it had to be dismissed.

Final Conclusion: The amendment operated so as to remove the court's power to grant relief under the omitted provision in pending applications, and the appeal failed.

Ratio Decidendi: Where an amending statute clearly provides that the law as amended shall apply to pending proceedings, the omitted provision ceases to govern those proceedings notwithstanding the beneficent character of the legislation or the general saving principle.

---