A.P.Sen, J. - (1.) This purports to be an appeal by the plaintiff under Order XLIII, Rule 1 (m) of the Civil P. C. against the order of Civil Judge, Ganganagar, dated 14-31977, refusing to record an alleged compromise.
(2.) The Civil P, C, (Amendment) Act, 1976, came into force w. e. f. 1-2-1977, making drastic changes in the Civil P. C. Section 89 of the Amendment Act brings about several changes in Order XLIII. By Clause 1 (b), Clauses (b), (e), (g), (h), (m), (o) and (v) of Order XLIII have been omitted. As a result of the amendment, the order passed by the learned Civil Judge was a non-appealable order. The order was passed on 14-3-1977. Order XLIII, Rule 1 (m) stood deleted w. e. f. 1-2-1977. The present appeal was filed on 23-4-1977.
(3.) Shri B. R. Arora, learned counsel for the respondent No. 1, raises a preliminary objection that having regard to the provision contained in Section 97 (2) (zb), the vested right of appeal, if any, against an order under Order 23, Rule 3, was taken away by the repeal of Order XLIII, Rule 1 (m). There is, in my view, great force in his submission. Section 97 (2) (zb) reads:- "97, (1) x x x x (2) Notwithstanding that the provisions of this Act have come into force or the repeal under Sub-section (1) has taken effect, and without prejudice to the generality of the provisions of Section 6 of the General Clauses Act, 1897,-- X X X X X X (zb) the provisions of Order XLIII of the First Schedule, as amended by Section 89 of this Act, shall not apply to any appeal against any order pending immediately before the commencement of the said Section 89; and every such appeal shall be disposed of as if the said S, 89 had not come into force.";