The right of appeal to a particular forum is a vested right and cannot be altered by a future Act unless it is specifically provided therein or one can deduce by necessary implication that the Legislature intended so.

( 1 ) 1. Since the question of law involved in these S. Rs. is common, they are being disposed of by this common order. The question for consideration is whether the A. P. Civil courts Act, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), is retrospective or prospective. The Office has raised the objection that the Act is retrospective in nature and, therefore, the appeal which has been filed against the decree of the Court of Sub-Judge to the High Court after the Act came into force and in which the valuation is not more than rs. 15,000/ ought to have been filed in the Court of the District judge and not in the High Court.

( 2 ) IN order to appreciate the contentions, it is necessary to examine the relevant provisions of the act. The Act received the assent of the Governor on 13th October 1972. The preamble to the Act provides that it is only to consolidate and amend the law relating to the civil Courts subordinate to the High Court in the State of Andhra pradesh. In Section 1 (3) it is provided that the Act shall come into force in such area and on such date as the Government may, by notification, appoint, and they may appoint different dates for different areas and for different provisions of this Act.

( 3 ) THE next relevant provision which concerns us in this case, is section 17 of the Act, which is as follows:"17 (1) An appeal shall, when it is allowed by law, lie from any decree or order in a civil suit or proceeding: (i) of the District Court, to the High Court, (ii) of the Court of Subordinate Judge, (a) to the District Court, when the amount or value of the subject matter of the suit or proceeding is not more than rupees fifteen thousand; (b) to the High Court, in other cases; and (iii) of the court of District Munsif, to the District Court. (2) The District Judge may, subject to the order of the High court, transfer for disposal any appeal from the decree or order of a court of District Munsif preferred in the District court, to any court of Subordinate Judge within the district. (3) Where a court of Subordinate Judge is established in any district at a place remote from the seat of the District court, the High Court, may, with the previous sanction of the government, direct that an appeal from the decree or order of any court of District Munsif within the local limits of the jurisdiction of such court of Subordinate Judge shall be preferred in the said Court of Subordinate Judge: provided that the District Judge may, from time to time, transfer to his own court, any appeal so preferred, and dispose it of himself".

( 4 ) A plain reading of Section 17 (1) of the Act would show that the right of appeal as provided in the repealed Acts is retained but only the forum has been changed from that of the High Court to the district Court when the value of the subject matter of the suit is not more than Rs 15. 000/- in which case the District Court will be the appellate authority in appeals filed against the decree of the court of Sub-Judge.

( 5 ) THE final relevant section is Section 34 of the Act, which provides as follows :-"34. (1) The Andhra Pradesh, (Andhra Area) Civil Courts act, 1873, the Andhra Pradesh (Telangana Area) Civil courts Act 1954 and Section 17 of the Andhra Pradesh (Telangana Area) Small causes Courts Act, 1330 Fasli are hereby repealed. (2) The provisions of Section 8 and 18 of the Andhra Pradesh general Clauses Act, 1891, shall apply upon such repeal. "

( 6 ) ON reading the Act as a whole in general and the Sections referred to above in particular, I am of the opinion that the legislature did not intend this Act to be retrospective. It is true that there are rulings to the effect that provisions in the Act giving power to the government such as in Section 1 (3) of the Act, to notify the fate on which the Act should come into force is a pointer for giving the Act retrospective effect; but this reasoning loses its force when section 34 of the Act, is perused. In Section 34 (2) of the Act, it is