Substantive law and Procedural law - Indian Laws - General

Meaning of Substantive law and Procedural law In the case of Executive Engineer, Dhenkanal Minor Irrigation Division v. N.C. Budharaj - 2001 (1) TMI 916 - SUPREME COURT , opined: 23. Substantive law , is that part of the law which creates, defines and regulates rights in contrast to what is called adjective or remedial law which provides the method of enforcing rights. Decisions, including the one in Jena case while adverting to the question of substantive law has chosen to indicate by way of illustration laws such as Sale of Goods Act, 1930 [Section 61(2)], Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (Section 80), etc. The provisions of the Interest Act, 1839, which prescribe the general law of interest and become applicable in the absence of any contractual or other statutory provisions specially dealing with the subject, would also answer the description of substantive law In the case of Thirumalai Chemicals Ltd. v. Union of India- 2011 (4) TMI 489 - SUPREME COURT, this Court comparing substantial law with procedural law, stated: 23. Substantive law refers to a body of rules that creates, defines and regulates rights and liabilities. Right conferred on a party to prefer an appeal against an order is a substantive right conferred by a statute which remains unaffected by subsequent changes in law, unless modified expressly or by necessary implication. Procedural law establishes a mechanism for determining those rights and liabilities and a machinery for enforcing them. Right of appeal being a substantive right always acts prospectively. It is trite law that every statute is prospective unless it is expressly or by necessary implication made to have retrospective operation. In Katikara Chintamani Dora v. Guntreddi Annamnaidu- 1973 (12) TMI 79 - SUPREME COURT, this Court held: 50. It is well settled that ordinarily, when the substantive law is altered during the pendency of an action, rights of the parties are decided according to law, as it existed when the action was begun unless the new statute shows a clear intention to vary such rights (Maxwell on Interpretation, 12th Edn. 220). That is to say, in the absence of anything in the Act, to say that it is to have retrospective operation, it cannot be so construed as to have the effect of altering the law applicable to a claim in litigation at the time when the Act is passed . In the case of State of Punjab v. Bhajan Kaur- 2008 (5) TMI 604 - SUPREME COURT, this Court held: 9. A statute is presumed to be prospective unless held to be retrospective, either expressly or by necessary implication. A substantive law is presumed to be prospective. It is one of the facets of the rule of law. There is no doubt about the fact that the Act is a substantive law as vested rights of entitlement to a higher rate of interest in case of delayed payment accrues in favour of the supplier and a corresponding liability is imposed on the buyer. This Court, time and again, has observed that any substantive law shall operate prospectively unless retrospective operation is clearly made out in the language of the statute. Only a procedural or declaratory law operates retrospectively as there is no vested right in procedure. [PURBANCHAL CABLES CONDUCTORS (P.) LTD. VERSUS ASSAM STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD- 2013 (3) TMI 518 - SUPREME COURT]