Retrospective pre-emption amendment bars claim where reclaimed land existed before decree stage.

Amended Punjab pre-emption law was applied retrospectively at the stage of passing the decree, so the pre-emptor had to retain the right of pre-emption not only on the date of sale and suit but also when decree was to be passed. Section 5(b) was treated as containing no cut-off that limited reclamation to the suit date, while Section 21-A was held inapplicable because the issue concerned reclamation of the land itself, not a change in the vendee's status. As the land had been reclaimed before the decree stage, the pre-emption claim failed for that land.

---

---

Issues: Whether, in view of the amended Punjab Pre-emption Act, the applicability of Section 5(b) to agricultural waste land reclaimed by the vendee had to be examined at the date of the decree rather than at the date of the suit, and whether the plaintiff could maintain the pre-emption suit in respect of land reclaimed before the appellate decree.

Analysis: Section 31, inserted by the amendment, was held to operate retrospectively and to require the Court to give effect to the amended substantive provisions at the stage when the decree is to be passed. A pre-emptor must possess the right of pre-emption not only on the date of sale and the date of suit, but also when the decree is passed. Section 5(b) contains no time-limit restricting reclamation to the date of suit, and Section 21-A was held inapplicable because the case concerned reclamation of the land itself, not improvement in the vendee's status. Since the land in question had been reclaimed before the decree was to be passed, the suit could not survive as to that land.

Conclusion: The amended law applied at the date of the decree, and the pre-emption claim failed in respect of the land reclaimed by the vendee before the decree.

Ratio Decidendi: Where an amendment contains a retrospective bar, the appellate Court must apply the law as it stands at the time of passing the decree, and a pre-emption suit fails if the land has been validly reclaimed before that stage.

---