Retrospective revision rights cannot arise after repeal where proceedings were already instituted under the earlier statute.

Repeal of the Mamlatdars' Courts Act, 1876 by the Act of 1906 did not divest the Collector of jurisdiction to revisit proceedings already begun under the repealed statute. The suit was instituted under the earlier Act, and the revisional power conferred by the later Act applied only to suits under that new enactment. The pending proceeding was not transformed into a new suit by the repeal, and the Bombay General Clauses Act preserved accrued rights and pending proceedings unless a contrary intention appeared. Accordingly, repeal could not retrospectively create a fresh right of revision in respect of an existing proceeding, and the revision was not maintainable.

---

---

Issues: Whether the repeal of the Mamlatdars' Courts Act, 1876 by the Mamlatdars' Courts Act II of 1906 deprived the Collector of jurisdiction to entertain revision in a suit instituted under the repealed Act.

Analysis: The suit had been instituted under the earlier Act and the right involved was one accrued under that Act. The later Act conferred revisional power on the Collector only in respect of suits under the new Act, and the pending proceeding was not converted into a suit under the new Act merely because the repealing statute came into force. The saving provision in the Bombay General Clauses Act preserved accrued rights and pending legal proceedings unless a different intention appeared. A repeal cannot retrospectively create a new right of revision in respect of proceedings already commenced under the repealed enactment, because that would affect an existing legal proceeding and not merely regulate procedure.

Conclusion: The Collector had no jurisdiction to entertain the revision, and the application was rightly rejected. The rule was discharged against the applicant.

---