law: General Clauses Act, 1897
  6. Effect of repeal
  Where this Act, or any 13[Central Act] or Regulation made after
  
  the commencement of this Act, repeals any enactment hitherto made or hereafter
  
  to be made, then, unless a different intention appears, the repeal shall not-
  (a) revive anything not in force or existing at the time at
  
  which the repeal takes effect; or
  (b) affect the previous operation of any enactment so repealed
  
  or anything duly done or suffered thereunder ; or
  (c) affect any right, privilege, obligation or liability
  
  acquired, accrued or incurred under any enactment so repealed; or
  (d) affect any penalty, forfeiture or punishment incurred in respect
  
  of any offence committed against any enactment so repealed; or
  (e) affect 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 the repealing Act or Regulation had not been
  
  passed.
  Comment: Applying the Golden Rule of construction as
  
  stated by this Court in Garikapatti  Veeraya (AIR 1957 SC 540) (supra) in the amending Act there
  
  was nothing to show that the Act would have retrospective effect. As "the
  
  essential idea of a legal system is that current law should govern current
  
  activities". We hold that rate of compensation shall have to be determined
  
  in accordance with the provisions of the Act which was in force at the time
  
  compensation was payable i.e. unamended sub-section
  
  (4) of Section 25 of the Act would apply. Moreover, the amending Act affects
  
  the substantive right of the appellant, therefore, it would have prospective
  
  operation. There is also no express or implied provision in the amending Act to
  
  indicate that the Act will have retrospective effect. We, therefore, hold that
  
  the amending Act would apply prospectively. Maharaja Chintamani 
  
  Saran Nath Shahdeo ,
  
  Appellant v. State of Bihar AIR 1999 SUPREME COURT 3609