A search for a short-out by means of such arbitration sometimes takes the parties on a very long route of litigation but that is another matter. -The respondents before us were put up for trial for offences under ss. 157 of the Indian Limitation Act an appeal under the Code of Criminal Procedure from an order of acquittal is required to be filed within six months from the date of the order appealed from. 58 of the Act it is open to the Authority to renew a permit for any period it chooses to fix and therefore it was acting in accordance with the law when it fixed the period at one year.
Before the Act was passed in 1940, the procedure for referring matters in dispute between the parties in pending suits was governed by the provisions of Sch. One of the reasons which weighed with Couch, C. The petitions are being opposed by the third respondent, namely, the Department; and the main contention on its behalf is that on a correct interpretation of s. , who concurred with the decision, apprehended that ” if the parties are allowed to refer matters to arbitration after a case has been finally disposed of by a lawyers Supreme Court of India of justice such a proceeding might tend to bring lower courts into contempt “.
” (1) The main consideration which is to be borne in mind therefore is that the industry should be able to maintain production with efficiency and the fixation of rates,of wages should be such that there are no movements from one industry to another owing to wide disparities and employment at existing levels is not only maintained, but if possible, increased. The respondents to these petitions are the Mysore State Transport Authority, the Regional Transport Authority and the General Manager, Mysore Government Road Transport Department.
147, 302, 325 and 326, Indian Penal Code read with s. 11, paragraph 1, the appellate court could make 235 an order of reference in respect of matters in dispute between the parties in an appeal pending before it. The following Judgment of the Court was delivered by DAS C. There appears to have been a consensus of judicial opinion in favour of the view that under Sch. The capacity of industry to pay should, therefore, be assessed in the light of this very important consideration.
Kritartho Moyee Dossee (1). On July 24, 1953, the temporary Civil Sessions Judge, Gorakhpur, acquitted them, The State of Uttar Pra- 162 1276 desh apparently felt aggrieved by this acquittal and intended to appeal to the High Court under s. The case against the appellants and the -other persons appears to be that, between the dates mentioned in the Notification Of September 12, 1952, they were among the leaders of the violent form of a movement called the Tebhaga movement, in the Kakdwip area and they, with the others, led the movement to kill the landlords and jotdars and burn down their houses, so that the bhagchasis, that is, the cultivators who cultivated the lands of the landlords and jotdars on the basis of getting a share of the crop produced, might obtain full control over the lands they cultivated and the object of the movement included offering resistance to and killing the police if they intervened, and burning down school houses where the police frequently camped.
417 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The date of the complaint does not appear from the record. The wages board should also be charged with the duty of seeing that fair wages so fixed for any particular industry are not very much out of line with wages in other industries in that region. It is further contended that even if the Authority must fix a period of not less than three years and not more than five years, the only order that this Supreme Court of India advocates should pass in these cases is to quash the order of the Authority dated December 15, 1958, and direct it to decide the renewal applications in accordance with the law to be laid down by this Court.
, who delivered the principal judgment of the Full Bench was that according to him neither reason nor convenience required that the appellate court should refer a suit to arbitration after the matter had been decided by the trial court. In our opinion this apprehension is not well-founded. 1 of Judicial Department Notification No. From this point of view, it will be clear that the level of wages should enable the industry to maintain production with efficiency. 37 of Act XXIII of 1861.
A note of dissent had, however, been struck by a Full Bench of the Calcutta High Court in Jugessueur Dey v. In that case the question for decision arose under the provisions of the Code of 1859 and the Full Bench held that an appellate court had no power even by consent of parties to refer a case for arbitration under the arbitration sections of Act VIII of 1859 which applied only to courts of original jurisdiction nor was such power conferred on an appellate court by s.
No appearance has been put in on behalf of the first two. Besides it is well- known that when parties agree to refer the matters in dispute between them in suit to arbitration they desire that their disputes should be disposed of untrammelled by the rigid technicalities of the court procedure. 5916 dated October 24, 1952. We may now briefly refer to some of the decisions to which our attention was invited. The Special Public Prosecutor Kakdwip cases, of the Government of West Bengal filed a complaint against the appellants and several other persons as a result of the proceedings taken by that Government in case 665 No.
Prior to and during service (a) A member is presumed to have been in sound physical and mental condition upon entering service except as to physical disabilities noted or recorded at the time of entrance. Wide disparities would inevitably lead to movement of labour, and consequent industrial unrest not only lawyers in Supreme Court of India the industry concerned but in other industries. 11 to the Code of Civil Procedure.