https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=174219 A retrospectively inserted proviso in section 3 of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 was treated as part of the provision from the date of enactment, bringing the tenancy within the Act. On that reading, section 50 barred the civil court from entertaining the eviction suit, so the decree was made without inherent jurisdiction and was a nullity. A void decree may be questioned even in execution, and the executing court may refuse to enforce it. The retrospective wording also displaced any reliance on finality of the earlier decree, so the execution objection was rightly upheld. en-us Thu, 24 Feb 1977 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 03 Oct 2015 15:42:46 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=174219 A retrospectively inserted proviso in section 3 of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 was treated as part of the provision from the date of enactment, bringing the tenancy within the Act. On that reading, section 50 barred the civil court from entertaining the eviction suit, so the decree was made without inherent jurisdiction and was a nullity. A void decree may be questioned even in execution, and the executing court may refuse to enforce it. The retrospective wording also displaced any reliance on finality of the earlier decree, so the execution objection was rightly upheld. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 24 Feb 1977 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=174219