Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Indian Laws Indian Laws + SC Indian Laws - 2000 (5) TMI SC This

  • Login
  • Cases Cited
  • Referred In
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2000 (5) TMI 1063 - SC - Indian Laws

Issues involved: Determination of the period of limitation for filing a suit challenging the removal of an employee from service.

Summary:
The appellant, a former employee of the State Bank of India, was removed from service in 1983. He challenged this removal through various appeals and suits. The main issue was whether the suit filed in 1988 was within the period of limitation. The appellant claimed the benefit of Section 14 of the Limitation Act, arguing that the time spent in pursuing appeals under the Tamil Nadu Shops and Establishments Act should be excluded from the limitation period. The respondent contended that the proceedings before the Deputy Commissioner of Labour (Appeals) did not qualify as "civil proceedings" and thus, the benefit of Section 14 should not apply.

The Court analyzed the relevant provisions of the Tamil Nadu Shops and Establishments Act, 1947, specifically Section 41, which allows for appeals to be filed within a prescribed time frame. The rules governing the appeal process were also examined, highlighting the jurisdiction and powers of the Appellate Authority.

Referring to Section 14 of the Limitation Act, the Court emphasized that the term "court" in this context does not necessarily mean a "civil court" under the Code of Civil Procedure. Citing precedents, the Court established that any Tribunal or Authority deciding the rights of parties could be considered a "court" for the purpose of Section 14.

Ultimately, the Court concluded that the Deputy Commissioner of Labour (Appeals) constituted under the Tamil Nadu Shops and Establishments Act was indeed a "court" within the meaning of Section 14. Therefore, the time spent in the departmental and appellate proceedings should be excluded from the limitation period calculation. Consequently, the suit filed by the appellant was deemed to be within the prescribed time limit, and the appeal was allowed.

This judgment clarified the interpretation of Section 14 of the Limitation Act in the context of administrative or quasi-judicial bodies, ensuring that the period spent in such proceedings can be excluded from the limitation period for filing a suit.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates