JUDGMENT : 1. Rule, made returnable forthwith. Shri Shirodkar, the learned Counsel waives service for the respondent Nos. 1 to 6, who are the only contesting parties. Heard finally by consent of parties. 2. The present petition challenges the judgment and order dated 31-8-2017, passed by the learned District Judge at Mapusa in Tenancy Appeal No. 264/2015. Indisputably, the order challenged before the learned District Judge was passed by the Mamlatdar of Bicholim under the provisions of Goa, Daman and Diu Agricultural Tenancy Act, 1964. It appears that the said appeal was initially filed before the Deputy Collector as per the Law prevailing then and in view of amendment, conferring jurisdiction to hear appeal on the District Court, the appeal came to be transferred to the District Court. However, the provisions of the Act came to be further amended by the Goa Agricultural Tenancy (Amendment) Act of 2017. Section 9(2) of the Amendment Act, which is relevant for the purpose reads thus : “9(2). All appeals and revisions against the orders passed by the Mamlatdar, pertaining to the applications and/ or proceedings referred to in sub-section (1), filed and pending with the District Court, if any, immediately before the commencement of the Goa Agricultural Tenancy (Amendment) Act, 2017, shall, on such commencement, stand transferred to the Collector having jurisdiction over such matters and such Collector may proceed to deal with such matters from the stage at which they have reached before such transfer.” It can, thus, be seen that in so far as the appeals and revisions against the orders passed by the Mamlatdar are concerned, the appeals and revisions pending before the District Judge are to stand transferred on the commencement of the Amendment Act, 2017. The Amendment Act was published in the official gazette on 31-8-2017, the day on which the impugned judgment was passed. It can, thus, clearly be seen that the day on which the appeal came to be decided, the learned District Judge by virtue of the Amendment Act, had ceased to have jurisdiction to entertain the appeal. In such circumstances, the impugned judgment would be rendered without jurisdiction. 3. In the result, the following order is passed : (i) The petition is partly allowed. (ii) The impugned judgment and order is hereby set aside. The appeal is restored to the file of the learned District Judge. In such circumstances, the impugned judgment would be rendered without jurisdiction. 3. In the result, the following order is passed : (i) The petition is partly allowed. (ii) The impugned judgment and order is hereby set aside. The appeal is restored to the file of the learned District Judge. The learned District Judge shall transfer the appeal to the learned Deputy Collector at Bicholim, for disposal according to law. (iii) Parties to appear before the learned Deputy Collector, Bicholim on 14-6-2018 at 10.30 a.m. (iv) Rule is made absolute in the aforesaid terms, with no order as to costs. Petition partly allowed.