https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=291366 The U.P. amendment transferring revisional jurisdiction under Section 25 of the Provincial Small Cause Courts Act to the District Judge did not divest the High Court of jurisdiction in revisions already filed before 4 June 1957 where the Court had previously called for the record. Section 6 of the U.P. General Clauses Act preserved proceedings already commenced and acts duly done under the repealed provision, so pending matters were saved from the jurisdictional transfer. The amended provision was not construed retrospectively, as that would unfairly prejudice litigants who had approached the then-existing forum before the change took effect. en-us Thu, 30 Jan 1958 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 07 Nov 2020 14:23:22 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=291366 The U.P. amendment transferring revisional jurisdiction under Section 25 of the Provincial Small Cause Courts Act to the District Judge did not divest the High Court of jurisdiction in revisions already filed before 4 June 1957 where the Court had previously called for the record. Section 6 of the U.P. General Clauses Act preserved proceedings already commenced and acts duly done under the repealed provision, so pending matters were saved from the jurisdictional transfer. The amended provision was not construed retrospectively, as that would unfairly prejudice litigants who had approached the then-existing forum before the change took effect. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 30 Jan 1958 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=291366