1969 (4) TMI 110

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....re barred under art. 137 of the Limitation Act, 1963, insofar as the claim was for period beyond three years. In holding this the Labour Court followed the decision of the Full Bench of the Bombay High Court in The Manager M/s. P. K. Porwal v. The Labour Court(70 Bom. L.R. 104.). The Bombay High Court held that applications filed under s. 33C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act prior to its amendment by Central Act XXXVI of 1964 were governed by the period of limitation laid down in art. 137 of the Limitation Act, 1963, and this article applied to applications under laws other than those contained in the Civil Procedure Code, 1908. This Court in Town Municipal Council, Athani v. The Presid- ing Officer, Labour Court, Hubli ([1970] 1 S.C.R. 51....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....pired if the court is satisfied that the applicant had sufficient cause for not preferring the application. It seems to us that the scheme of the Indian Limitation Act is that it only deals with applications to courts, and that the Labour ,Court is not a court within the Indian Limitation Act, 1963. It is not necessary to express our views on the first ground given by this Court in Town Municipal Council, Athani v. The Presiding Officer Labour Court, Hubli([1970] 1 S.C.R. 51.). It seems to us that it may require serious consideration whether applications to courts under other provisions, apart from Civil Procedure Code, are included within art. 137 of the Limitation Act, 1963, or not. The learned counsel for the respondent contends that th....