Jurisdiction of the court under new procedural laws supersedes previous ones unless vested rights are explicitly preserved.

1. This civil revision petition is filed under Art.227 of the Constitution in somewhat unusual circumstances, which can be stated briefly, A suit O. S. No. 21 of 1968 was pending between Kichenaramanoudjam Chettiar (Plaintiff) and Alamelu Ammale and four other persons, in the Court of the Premier Instance at Karaikal. That suit was instituted on 7-4-1967. The Pondicherry Legislature passed the Pondicherry Civil Courts Act . 1966 (Act 12 of 1966). This Act provided lor the replacement of the existing hierarchy of Courts dealing with civil law in the Pondicherry Union Territory (which was formerly a part of the overseas territories of France) by a hierarchy of Courts following the same pattern as in the Indian Union. To illustrate this, under S.6(1) of the Act, the Tribunal Superieur d' Appel becomes the Court of the District Judge, the Tribunal of the Premier Instance becomes the Court of a Sub-Judge and the Court of the Judges de Paix becomes the Munsifs Court.
This Act was to come into force on such date as the Pondicherry Government by notification in the official gazette may appoint. Thereafter, the Parliament enacted the Pondicherry (Extension of Laws) Act , 1968 (Act 26 of 1968) which came into force on 5-9-1968. The Pondicherry Civil Courts Act was also brought into force on the same date. S.3(1) of the extended the various enactments mentioned in Part I of the Schedule, to the Pondicherry State subject to the modification mentioned in the schedule, from the abovesaid date. The Code of Civil Procedure , 1908, is one of enactments mentioned in the schedule. That Code as in force in the State of Madras on the 1st day of August 1966 was extended to Pondicherry.
A certain modification was made in column 5 of the schedule by stating that any judgment decree or order passed or made before the enactment under the preexisting law in Pondicherry shall be deemed to have been made or passed under the Civil Procedure Code; but any period of limitation in respect of such judgment, decree or order under the preexisting law should not be treated as having been extended. Correspondingly there was also introduced in the a repealing and saving provision as follows: -
"4(1). Any law in force in Pondicherry or any area thereof corresponding to any Act referred to in sub-section (1) of S.3 or any part thereof (except in so far as such law continues to be applicable to Renoncants) shall stand repealed as from the coming into force of such Act in Pondicherry.
(2) Nothing in sub-section (1) shall affect -
(a) the previous operation of any law so repealed or anything duly done or suffered thereunder; or
(b) any right, privilege, obligation or liability acquired, accrued or incurred under any law so repealed; or
(c) any penalty, forfeiture or punishment incurred in respect of any offence committed against any law so repealed; or
(d) any investigation, legal proceeding or remedy in respect of any such right, privilege, obligation, liability, penalty, forfeiture or punishment as aforesaid, and any such investigation, legal proceeding or remedy may be instituted, continued or enforced and any such penalty, forfeiture or punishment may be imposed as if this Act had not been passed:
Provided that anything done or any action taken (including any appointment or delegation made, notification, instruction or direction issued, form, bye - law or scheme framed, certificate obtained, permit or licence granted, or registration effected) under any such law, shall be deemed to have been done or taken under the corresponding provision of the Act extended to Pondicherry by this Act and shall continue to be in force accordingly unless and until superseded by anything done or any action taken under the said Act."
Shortly after this,