https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=289307 The Claims Tribunal's jurisdiction was held to depend on both the forum created by the Motor Vehicles Act and the limitation regime attached to the remedy. A procedural change may operate retrospectively, but a new limitation provision cannot be applied to extinguish an existing cause of action or vested right of action without clear legislative intent. Sections 110 to 110-F contained no express indication that claims arising from pre-constitution accidents were to be governed retrospectively. The proviso allowing condonation of delay did not change that position, because delay could otherwise be addressed under the Limitation Act. The Tribunal therefore had no jurisdiction over claims arising from accidents that occurred before its constitution. en-us Mon, 12 May 1969 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 24 Jul 2020 15:37:55 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=289307 The Claims Tribunal's jurisdiction was held to depend on both the forum created by the Motor Vehicles Act and the limitation regime attached to the remedy. A procedural change may operate retrospectively, but a new limitation provision cannot be applied to extinguish an existing cause of action or vested right of action without clear legislative intent. Sections 110 to 110-F contained no express indication that claims arising from pre-constitution accidents were to be governed retrospectively. The proviso allowing condonation of delay did not change that position, because delay could otherwise be addressed under the Limitation Act. The Tribunal therefore had no jurisdiction over claims arising from accidents that occurred before its constitution. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 12 May 1969 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=289307