A liability incurred under a repealed statute can only be enforced to the extent and in the manner provided in that statute.

( 1 ) THIS regular second appeal was referred to a larger Bench at the instance of one of us (Andley J.) because at that time it was felt that the view expressed by Deshpande, J. in R. S. A. No. 328-D of 1962 in re: Municipal Corporation of Delhi v. Bheri Rain which was decided on January 20, 1971, may require recon sideration. After hearing arguments in this matter, we feel that this appeal can be decided upon its own facts.

( 2 ) SHORTLY stated, the facts are that the respondent had built a building, according to her, in 1957 and, according to the appellant Corporation, in 1960 without its sanction and a notice was served upon the respondent by the Corporation requiring her to demolish the prenmises. The respondent filed a suit in the trial Court for a permanent injunction to restrain the appellant Corporation from demolishing the building. The trial Court by its judgment and decree dated January 10, 1962 dismissed the suit. The respondent thereupon filed an appeal which was heard by the Additional Senior Subordinate Judge. Delhi, who allowed the appeal by his judgment dated January 28. 1963.

( 3 ) ONE of the questions of fact which was in issue between the parties was as to the year in which the building had been constructed. After appreciating the oral and documentary evidence on the record. the first appellate Court held that the building had been constructed by the respondent in 1957 and not in 1960. On this finding, which is binding on. this Court in second appeal and, it may be stated, has not been challenged by the appellant Corporation, the question that arose tor consideration was whether the appellant Corporation was entitled in law to issue the notice of demolition.

( 4 ) THE appellant Corporation was established by the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act. 1957, which came into force on April 9, 1958 Prior to this the Punjab Municipal Act, 1911. hereinafter referred to as "the Punjab Act" was applicable. Section 195 of the Punjab Act. in so far as it is relevant, provided.-

"195. Should a building he begun, erected or re-erected- (a) without sanction as required by section 189 (1); the committee may by notice delivered to the owner within six months from the completion of the building, require the building to be altered or demolished as it may deem necessary within the period specified in such notice:. . . . . . . . . . "

ADMITTEDLY, the building in question was erected without the requisite sanction and. therefore, if the Punjab Act had continued to apply, the Municipality would have been entitled to require the respondent to demolish the said building. The first appellate Court has not given any finding as to the exact date or time when the building was constructed by the respondent other than saying that it was constructed in 1957. Taking the last day of the year 1957 to be the day when the building was constructed, the Municipality, if it had continued. could have served the notice of demolition under the aforesaid section by or before June 30, 1958.

( 5 ) AS stated earlier, the Corporation was established under the Delhi Municipal Corporation act. 1957, hereinafter referred to as "the Corporation Act", with effect from April 9, 1958 and by reason of clause (b) of sub-section (1) of section 516 of the Corporation Act read with its Thirteenth Schedule, the Punjab Act ceased to have effect within Delhi. Then clause (b) of sub-section (2) of this section provided that.-

"all debts, obligations and liabilities incurred, all contracts entered into and all matters and things engaged to be done by, with or for any of the bodies or local authorities specified in the Second Schedule before such establishment shall be deemed to have been incurred, entered into or engaged to be done by, with or for the Corporation or the municipal authority concerned. "

THE contetion on behalf of the appellant Corporation is that the respondent had incurred a liability with the Municipal Committee. Delhi, which is one of the authorit