Retrospective tenancy protection applied to pending suit, reviving protected tenant status and ousting civil court jurisdiction.

A beneficial tenancy amendment may apply to pending proceedings where retrospective operation is express or necessarily implied and no final vested right has crystallised. The Court held that the 1952 amendment to the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act revived the respondents' protected tenant status in the pending suit, because the earlier exclusion was deleted and the protective regime had to be construed liberally. It further held that the civil court could not continue once the amended tenancy protection applied. The landlords' appeal was dismissed, and the connected appeal succeeded consequentially.

---

---

Issues: Whether the 1952 amendment to the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 applied to the pending suit so as to revive the respondents' status as protected tenants and deprive the civil court of jurisdiction.

Analysis: The amendment deleted the exclusion that had earlier taken the land outside the Act, and the Court treated the legislation as a beneficial tenancy enactment requiring liberal construction. It held that an amendment of this nature could apply to pending proceedings by express provision or necessary implication, and relied on the principle that a court must apply the law as it stands on the date of judgment where no final vested decree had accrued. The earlier authorities were distinguished or treated as supporting the retrospective application of tenancy protection to pending litigation, and the continuance of the tenancy under the earlier statute did not prevent the amended protective regime from operating in the pending suit.

Conclusion: The 1952 amendment applied to the pending suit, the respondents' protected tenancy stood revived, and the civil court had no jurisdiction to proceed further. The appeal by the landlords was dismissed, while the connected appeal consequentially succeeded.

Ratio Decidendi: An amendment to a beneficial tenancy statute may apply to pending proceedings, even if it affects substantive rights, where the legislative intent to operate retrospectively is express or necessarily implied and no final vested right has crystallised.

---