https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168612 The Court traced the legislative history of the Travancore-Cochin Public Safety Measures Act and held that a Bill validly introduced before the Constitution came into force was not rendered invalid because it was later redrafted in Select Committee. The proviso to article 304(b) was held to apply to introduction of a Bill or to amendments requiring Presidential sanction, not to a Bill already validly introduced and still pending. The Court also rejected automatic substitution of an earlier prohibition order by a later invalid one, treating the earlier ban on forward contracts in cocoanut oil as continuing. The contracts were therefore unenforceable and the suit for damages could not be maintained. en-us Mon, 09 Dec 1968 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 04 May 2015 10:30:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168612 The Court traced the legislative history of the Travancore-Cochin Public Safety Measures Act and held that a Bill validly introduced before the Constitution came into force was not rendered invalid because it was later redrafted in Select Committee. The proviso to article 304(b) was held to apply to introduction of a Bill or to amendments requiring Presidential sanction, not to a Bill already validly introduced and still pending. The Court also rejected automatic substitution of an earlier prohibition order by a later invalid one, treating the earlier ban on forward contracts in cocoanut oil as continuing. The contracts were therefore unenforceable and the suit for damages could not be maintained. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 09 Dec 1968 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168612