Pending suits retain their original forum despite a statutory change, unless the new law clearly removes that right.

The 1951 Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act changed the forum for future proceedings, but Section 103(j) saved suits, applications and other proceedings already pending at commencement, while Section 103(k) preserved the remedies available in those matters. Section 93 operated prospectively and did not bar continuation of pending cases. A party was held to retain a vested substantive right to have a matter tried in the forum where it was validly instituted unless the statute clearly provided otherwise. The District Court therefore retained jurisdiction over pending matters commenced under the repealed Act, subject to transfer under Section 24 CPC.

---

---

Issues: Whether pending suits and applications instituted under the repealed Madras Act II of 1927 could continue before the District Court or Sub Court after the Madras Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1951 came into force, notwithstanding the altered definition of "court" and the saving provisions in Section 103.

Analysis: The new Act changed the forum for future proceedings, but Section 103(j) preserved suits, applications and other proceedings already pending at commencement, and Clause (k) preserved the remedies available in respect of such pending proceedings. Section 93 was treated as prospective in operation, because it prohibited institution of proceedings in breach of the new Act but did not expressly or by necessary intendment bar continuance of pending matters. The Court held that a litigant has a vested substantive right to have a suit or application tried in the forum where it was properly commenced, and that such a right is not taken away by a mere change in forum unless the statute clearly says so. The District Court therefore retained jurisdiction over the pending matters, subject to its power under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure to transfer them to the Sub Court.

Conclusion: The change in forum did not oust the jurisdiction of the District Court over pending matters commenced under the old Act, and the orders returning the plaint and petition were ; the matters were to be treated as pending or transferred and proceeded with according to law.

---