The expiration of a statute does not affect any liability incurred under the statute or any punishment incurred in respect of any contravention thereof or any order made thereunder, and any investigation or legal proceeding instituted is to continue and be enforced as if the statute had not expired.

Hari Lal Agrawal, J.

This application in revision is by the tenant• defendant, who challanges the ORDER :passed under Section 11A of the Bihar Building (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as' the Act'), co-responding to Section 13 of the 1977 Act, on 8th of May, 1981, by the trial court, on the ground that since the 1977 Act had expired. On 31st of March, 1981 the Court below could not pass the ORDER :in question.

2. The relevant facts, briefly stated, are as follows. On 9th of February, 1974 the title suit in question was instituted in the Court below against the defendant petitioner for his eviction on the ground of default and personal necessity from the suit premises.

The petitioner filed his written statement in May, 1975, contesting the suit. The plaintiff filed an application U/s. 11A of Act on 18.12.75 for an ORDER :against, the tenant to pay the arrears as well as the current and future rents in terms of the said provisions. On a plea being taken by the defendant that the provision of the Act was not made applicable to the ales where the suit premises was situated, the trial court by its ORDER :dated 8.1.1979, upheld the validity of the said objection and rejected the application under Section 11A of the Act. The additional ground on which the application was rejected was that the 1947 Act itself in the mean time had expired.

3. The matter came to this Court in civil Revision No. 174 of 1979 against the said ORDER :and in view of the fact that the 1977 Act which had come into force with a retrospective effect as well as by a gazette notification dated 11th February, 1980, the Civil Lines Police Station of Gaya city was brought under the purview of 1977 Act, the petitioner withdrew his said Civil Revision application on 14.1.1981 perhaps for the purpose of vindicating these points in the trial court itself, although the ground for withdrawal was not specifically mentioned in the ORDER :of withdrawal. It may be mentioned that the notification of 11th February, 1980 was to be deemed to have come into force with effect from the 1st April, 1976. The saving clause of the 1977 Act also filled up the interregnum by the retrospective operation of the provisions of this Act in between the date of expiry of 1947 Act and coming into force of the 1977 Act (31st August, 1977). On these grounds the landlord made an application on 18th April, 1981, in the trial court for recalling the earlier ORDER :dated 8.2.1979 and also for appropriate directions to the tenant for paying the arrears as well as the current and future rents. This application of the landlord has been allowed by the court below.

4. The main argument of Mr. Ramakant Verma appearing in support of this application was that in as much as on the 8th May, 1981, the Bihar Building Control Act, 1977 was not in force the Court below could not have passed any ORDER :within the purview of the said Act or the preceding 1947 Act. In ORDER :to appreciate this argument, it is necessary to refer to the provisions contained in section (1) of 1977 Act itself which inter alia, deals with its "extent and commencement". Subsection (3) of Sec. 1 said that it would be deemed to have come into force on the 1st April, 1976 and it would remain in force up to the 31st of March, 1981. Left by itself the argument of Mr. Verma could be acceptable but a proviso has been added to this Sub-section. Clause (b) of this proviso provided that the expiration of this Act would not.

"(b) affect any liability incurred under that Act or any punishment incurred in respect of any contravention of that Act or any ORDER :made thereunder;

and any such investigation or legal proceeding may be instituted, continued or enforced and any such punishment may be imposed as if that Act had not expired."

Thus clause (b) specifically provided that notwithstanding the expiration, any liability incurred under the 1977 Act or any punishment incurred in respect of any contravention thereof as