Retrospective limitation not implied where an amendment would extinguish accrued possession claims without clear legislative intent.

A limitation amendment shortening the time for an under-raiyat to sue for possession was held not to apply retrospectively to causes of action that had already accrued before the amendment came into force. The court reasoned that a statute should not be construed to impair vested rights or extinguish an existing enforceable claim unless retrospective intent is expressed by clear words or necessary implication. Because the amended provision would have immediately barred pre-existing claims, it was treated as prospective only. The suit therefore remained maintainable and was not defeated by the special limitation period.

---

---

Issues: Whether the amendment of Article 3 in the Third Schedule of the Bengal Tenancy Act by Section 61(3) of the Eastern Bengal and Assam Tenancy Amendment Act, 1908, applied retrospectively to bar suits by under-raiyats where the cause of action had accrued before the amendment came into force.

Analysis: The amended provision shortened the time for an under-raiyat to sue for possession and, if applied to pre-existing causes of action, would at once extinguish rights that were already enforceable under the previous limitation regime. A statute is not to be construed as retrospective so as to impair vested rights unless such intention appears by clear words or necessary implication. Although rules of procedure may generally operate on pending matters, a limitation provision that immediately destroys existing causes of action is not merely procedural. In the absence of language plainly compelling that result, the amended limitation period must be taken as prospective only.

Conclusion: The amendment did not operate retrospectively against causes of action that arose before the Act came into force, and the suit was not barred by the special limitation.

Ratio Decidendi: A new limitation statute that shortens the period for suit and comes into force immediately will not be construed to extinguish already accrued and enforceable causes of action unless retrospective intent is expressed with clear and unmistakable language.

---