Protected-tenant rights under tenancy law were preserved by the saving clause and not divested by later exclusion.

Protected-tenant status acquired under sections 3 and 3A(1) of the Bombay Tenancy Act, 1939, and recognised in the revenue record, was treated as an accrued right. The landlord did not challenge that status within the statutory time. Section 31 of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 continued persons already deemed protected tenants, while section 88 was held to operate prospectively and not to divest vested rights. Section 89(2)(b)(i) preserved accrued rights and section 89(2)(b)(ii) kept pending proceedings alive under the repealed regime. The defendants therefore retained protected-tenant status despite the later exclusion provision.

---

---

Issues: Whether the defendants had acquired and retained the status of protected tenants under the Bombay Tenancy Act, 1939, and whether that accrued status was taken away by the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948, particularly in view of the exclusion under section 88 and the saving provision in section 89.

Analysis: The protected-tenant status arose under sections 3 and 3A(1) of the 1939 Act and was recognised by the revenue record. The landlord did not invoke the statutory mechanism to challenge that status within the time allowed. The later Act's section 31 treated persons already deemed protected tenants under the earlier Act as protected tenants for the purposes of the new Act. Section 88 was held to operate prospectively and to exclude the area from the new Act's future operation, but not to divest rights already accrued. Section 89(2)(b)(i) preserved accrued rights, while section 89(2)(b)(ii) ensured that pending proceedings relating to such rights would continue as if the repealing Act had not been passed.

Conclusion: The defendants' protected-tenant status was an accrued right saved by the repealing provision and was not destroyed by section 88.

Final Conclusion: The dispute had to be decided under the repealed 1939 regime, with the result that the defendants were entitled to retain the protection claimed by them.

Ratio Decidendi: A statutory status that has already accrued and been recognised under a repealed enactment is preserved by a saving clause, and a later exclusionary provision operates prospectively unless the legislature clearly manifests an intention to divest vested rights.

---