1. The first respondent as the heir to the estate of her deceased father sued on the original side of this Court to recover possession of two houses, one being known as No. 9, Subbarayalu Naidu Lane, and the other as No. 17, Narayana Mudali Street, G. T., Madras. The appeal is concerned only with the first mentioned property. The respondents case is entirely devoid of merit, but the learned Judge found that in law she was entitled to possession of No. 9, Subbarayahl Naidu Lane, and accordingly passed a decree giving her possession. The learned Judge indicated, however, that no one would be more pleased than he, if, in the event of an appeal being filed, the Judges who heard it should find themselves able to arrive at a different conclusion. We appreciate the learned Judges feelings in the matter and we regret as much as he that we feel bound to concur in the decree which he has passed.

2. The appeal has been placed before a Full Bench as it involves the consideration of the question whether Section 53-A of the Transfer of Property Act has retrospective effect, on which there is a conflict of opinion. If the section has retrospective)effect, the suit must fail, but if it has