https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169431 The Supreme Court held that appeals under Article 136 were incompetent as an arbitrator appointed under Section 10A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, did not qualify as a Tribunal under Article 136. The Court emphasized that the arbitrator's authority stemmed from the parties' agreement, not the State, and lacked inherent judicial power. Therefore, the appeals were dismissed, with costs awarded to the respondents in one appeal and no order as to costs in the other appeals. en-us Thu, 18 Oct 1962 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 20 Apr 2015 15:27:45 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169431 The Supreme Court held that appeals under Article 136 were incompetent as an arbitrator appointed under Section 10A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, did not qualify as a Tribunal under Article 136. The Court emphasized that the arbitrator's authority stemmed from the parties' agreement, not the State, and lacked inherent judicial power. Therefore, the appeals were dismissed, with costs awarded to the respondents in one appeal and no order as to costs in the other appeals. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 18 Oct 1962 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169431