You can grab notes for other topics from here.
During the year 1948, workmen went on illegal strike on account of Trade Union rivalry. The workmen were not paid wages for the strike period and the appellants lost their profit during the period. The employers and the workmen entered into an agreement during the pendency of the conciliation proceedings and referred the claims of workmen for salaries during the strike period and the claims of the employers for compensation for loss due to the strike to the arbitration.
The arbitrators delivered their award and held that the workmen participating in the strike were not entitled towages for the strike period, the strike being illegal. The arbitrators however, awarded huge compensation to the employers against the workmen for the losses incurred by the employers during the strike period.
The workmen challenged the award as illegal and void. The High Court upheld that part of the award which directed that the workmen participating in the strike were not entitled to wages. The High Court however, quashed the part of the award which directed payment of compensation by the workers to the management.
According to the arbitrators, the strike was illegal being in violation of the Act. The illegal strike was animated by inter-union power struggle and that it inflicted loss on the management by forced closure and that the loss flowing from the strike was liable to be recompensed by award of damages.
Here the question of law whether an illegal strike causing loss of profit justifies award of damages is involved. The SC held that arbitrator held in the affirmative and according to us it is an error of law. After coming to the conclusion that the strike was illegal they held that compensation follows based on the rule of English common law on the basis of tort of conspiracy and loss of business.
The workmen challenged the award as illegal and void. The High Court upheld that part of the award which directed that the workmen participating in the strike were not entitled to wages. The High Court however, quashed the part of the award which directed payment of compensation by the workers to the management.
According to the arbitrators, the strike was illegal being in violation of the Act. The illegal strike was animated by inter-union power struggle and that it inflicted loss on the management by forced closure and that the loss flowing from the strike was liable to be recompensed by award of damages. Here the question of law whether an illegal strike causing loss of profit justifies award of damages is involved. The SC held that arbitrator held in the affirmative and according to us it is an error of law. After coming to the conclusion that the strike was illegal they held that compensation follows based on the rule of English common law on the basis of tort of conspiracy and loss of business.
You can grab notes for other topics from here.
