Liakat-Un-Nissa Begam vs Imtiaz Begam and Others

Straight and Brodhurst, JJ.—There is no doubt that the former decision of this Court is open to the objection now urged by the counsel for the respondent, who did not appear on the first trial of the appeal; and it is clear to our mind that Section 12 of Act XXIII of 1871 has no retrospective operation, so as to invalidate assignments made before the passing of such Act. There is nothing in it to show that it was intended to interfere with rights vested, or interests acquired, and, unless there are clear words to show that it was, we are, according to a well-understood canon of construction of statutes, bound to infer to the contrary, and not to give it retrospective operation. The technical difficulty thus being cleared out of the plaintiff''s way, we think that the lower Courts properly decreed her suit, and in this view of the matter we dismiss the appeal with costs.