Survival of industrial dispute claims after a workman's death: legal heirs may continue proceedings under the Industrial Disputes Act.

An industrial dispute under the Industrial Disputes Act does not abate on the death of the concerned workman during pendency of the reference. The Supreme Court held that, in proceedings under Section 2-A, the right to pursue the claim can survive to the legal heirs or representatives because the Act's object of securing industrial peace supports continuation of claims for monetary and consequential relief, including relief capable of computation under Section 33-C(2). The Court limited the application of actio personalis moritur cum persona and rejected the contrary view drawn from Section 18(3). The legal heirs or representatives may therefore be substituted and continue the proceedings.

---

---

Issues: Whether an industrial dispute or claim under the Industrial Disputes Act survives the death of the concerned workman during pendency of the proceedings, and whether his legal heirs or representatives can be substituted and continue the reference.

Analysis: The dispute concerned termination of service under Section 2-A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, which treats an individual dispute as an industrial dispute. The Court examined conflicting High Court views and held that the death of the workman does not, by itself, extinguish the proceedings. The reasoning rested on the broader object of the Act to secure industrial peace, the survivability of monetary and other consequential reliefs, and the limited application of the maxim actio personalis moritur cum persona. The Court approved the reasoning that the right to pursue such proceedings can survive to heirs and legal representatives, including claims capable of computation under Section 33-C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, and rejected the contrary view based on Section 18(3) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.

Conclusion: The reference does not abate on the death of the workman, and the legal heirs or representatives are entitled to continue the proceedings.

---