Repeal Act abatement of urban land proceedings applied because the State failed to prove prior possession of surplus land.

Pending proceedings under the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 abated on the commencement of the Repeal Act, because the statutory exception in Section 4 applies only where possession of the surplus land had already been taken over by the State or its ory. The record showed no material that the State had taken possession, and the interim status quo and absence of a contrary reply supported continued possession with the landholder. As the exception to abatement was not established, the proceedings could not continue and the appeals succeeded on that basis.

---

---

Issues: Whether the pending proceedings under the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 abated on the coming into force of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Repeal Act, 1999 in the absence of any material showing that possession of the surplus land had been taken over by the State.

Analysis: Section 4 of the Repeal Act provides that all pending proceedings relating to orders made under the principal Act shall abate, subject to the exception for proceedings relatable to land of which possession has already been taken over by the State Government, an authorised person, or the competent authority. The record disclosed no material showing that the State had taken possession of the surplus land. On the contrary, the interim status quo and the absence of any contrary reply supported the appellant's case that possession remained with it. In these circumstances, the statutory exception to abatement was not attracted.

Conclusion: The pending proceedings abated under Section 4 of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Repeal Act, 1999, and the appeals were entitled to succeed on that basis.

Final Conclusion: The repeal statute brought the controversy to an end because the State had not established prior taking over of possession, so the proceedings could not continue.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the repealing statute directs abatement of pending proceedings and the State fails to show prior taking over of possession, the proceedings abate and the exception to abatement does not apply.

---