FAISAL ZAMAN KHAN, J.--- Through this Regular First Appeal, order and, decree dated 13.02.2021 passed by the learned Civil Judge Renala Khurd has been assailed by virtue of which a suit for specific performance, possession and permanent injunction filed by the respondent against the appellants has been decreed.
2. Ai the outset of hearing, learned counsel for the appellants was confronted with the maintainability of this appeal before this Court. Replying to the above, he submits that in view of amendment made in Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (Code) through the Code of Civil Procedure (Punjab Amendment) Ordinance, 2021 (Ordinance), this appeal is maintainable. However when confronted with Section 159 of the Ordinance which clearly provides that the proceedings pending before the promulgation of the Ordinance shall be governed by the provisions of the Code which existed prior to the said amendment Ordinance, he has no plausible response.
3. Despite his earnest efforts, learned counsel has not been able to justify filing of the appeal before this Court rather highlighted that an appeal was filed by the appellant before the District Court at Okara, however , the learned Presiding Officer raised the objection that in view of the amendment made to Section 96, CPC, appeal before the District Court is not maintainable, hence the appeal was withdrawn for availing appropriate remedy , thus the instant appeal has been filed.
4. Arguments heard. Record persued.
5. For addressing the controversy in hand, it will be appropriate to reproduce Section 159 introduced through the Ordinance:--- "159. Savings of Proceedings.--- All proceedings instituted prior to enactment of the Code of Civil Procedure (Punjab Amendment) Ordinance, 2021 shall be deemed to proceed and dealt in accordance with the provisions of the Code which existed prior to the said amendment Ordinance.
Explanation: In this section, the expression "proceedings" includes suit, appe al, review , revision, execution applications or any other proceedings and any matter incidental thereto."
6. Bare reading of the afore-noted provision clarifies that the operation/applicability of the Ordinance is prospective in nature as there is clear explanation in the said provision which highlights that proceedings initiated prior to promulgation of the Ordinance shall be deemed to proceed and dealt in accordance with the Code which existed prior to the promulgation of the said Ordinance .
7. Since the Code prior to the promulgation of the Ordinance contemplates that an appeal has to be filed before the respective District Court in cases where the pecuniary jurisdiction is less than Rupees Fifty Millions, thus the remedy available to the appellants is to approach the District Court of competent jurisdiction for assailing the impugned order and decree.
8. In view of above observations, learned counsel does not wish to press this appeal and in order to avail the alternate remedy prays for return of the memorandum of appeal.
9. For the above reasons, this appeal is dismissed as with drawn with a direction to the office of this Court to return the memorandum of appeal etc. to the appellants for presentation of the same before the appropriate fora.
10. Before parting with this order , it may be clarified that after promulgation of the Ordinance, an anomaly has arisen regarding the applicability of the Ordinance (whether it is applicable prospectively or retrospectively). As discussed above, Section 159 of the Ordinance in clear and unequivocal terms stipulates that the operation of the Ordinance is prospective in nature, thus the amendments introduced through the Ordinance will only be applicable to the suits which are filed after the 10th of February , 2021, when the Ordinance was notified in the Of ficial Gazette.
11. In view of above, let a copy of this order be sent to all the learned District and Session Judges of the Province of Punjab for implementation and necessary compliance.