https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=174184 A later amendment cannot reopen a tenancy claim that has already been finally rejected unless it retrospectively removes the statutory foundation of the earlier determination. The Court noted that the prior rejection of deemed tenancy under the Kerala Land Reforms Act had attained finality and rested on the prohibition against creating tenancies after 1 April 1964. Section 6C, though containing a non obstante clause, was not given retrospective effect and therefore did not displace the binding earlier decision. On that basis, the appellant could not re-agitate the same issue in execution proceedings, and res judicata continued to apply. en-us Wed, 25 Sep 1996 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 01 Oct 2015 18:20:38 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=174184 A later amendment cannot reopen a tenancy claim that has already been finally rejected unless it retrospectively removes the statutory foundation of the earlier determination. The Court noted that the prior rejection of deemed tenancy under the Kerala Land Reforms Act had attained finality and rested on the prohibition against creating tenancies after 1 April 1964. Section 6C, though containing a non obstante clause, was not given retrospective effect and therefore did not displace the binding earlier decision. On that basis, the appellant could not re-agitate the same issue in execution proceedings, and res judicata continued to apply. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 25 Sep 1996 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=174184