Indian Bare Acts

Search Alphabatically :

THE INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES ACT, 1947

Title : THE INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES ACT, 1947

Year : 1947



(1) Any workman who commences, continues or otherwise acts in furtherance of, a strike which is illegal under this Act, shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to one month, or with fine which may extend to fifty rupees, or with both.

(2) Any employer who commences, continues, or otherwise acts in furtherance of a lock-out which is illegal under this Act, shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to one month, or with fine which may extend to one thousand rupees, or with both.



Any person who instigates or incites others to take part in, or otherwise acts in furtherance of, a strike or lock-out which is illegal under this Act, shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to six months, or with fine which may extend to one thousand rupees, or with both.



Any person who knowingly expends or applies any money in direct furtherance or support of any illegal strike or lock-out shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to six months, or with fine which may extend to one thousand rupees, or with both.



Any person who commits a breach of any term of any settlement or award, which is binding on him under this Act, shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to six months, or with fine, or with both,

2*[and where the breach is a continuing one, with a further fine which may extend to two hundred rupees for every day during which the breach continues after the conviction for the first] and the Court trying the offence, if it fines the offender, may direct that the whole or any part of the fine realised from him shall be paid, by way of compensation, to any person who, in its opinion, has been injured by such breach.]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. Subs. by Act 36 of 1956, s. 20, for s. 29 (w.e.f. 17-9-1956).

2. Ins. by Act 35 of 1965, s. 6 (w.e.f. 1-12-1965).

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Any person who wilfully discloses any such information as is referred to in section 21 in contravention of the provisions of that section shall, on complaint made by or on behalf of the trade union or individual business affected, be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to six months, or with fine which may extend to one thousand rupees, or with both.


30A. 1*Penalty for closure without notice.

Any employer who closes down any undertaking without complying with the provisions of section 25FFA shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to six months, or with fine which may extend to five thousand rupees, or with both.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. Ins. by Act 32 of 1972, s. 3 (w.e.f. 14-6-1972).

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



(1) Any employer who contravenes the provisions of section 33 shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to six months, or with fine which may extend to one thousand rupees, or with both.

(2) Whoever contravenes any of the provisions of this Act or any rule made thereunder shall, if no other penalty is elsewhere provided by or under this Act for such contravention, be punishable with fine which may extend to one hundred rupees.

Last updated on May, 2016

Find a Lawyer

Legal Hall of Fame

The current Legal Luminaries of India, the credible names in the legal circle along with those who would be the leading stars of the next decade. These are some of the reliable names in field of law. Nominate the Legal Stars of tomorrow

More

Recent Judgment


Sudha Mishra vs. Surya Chandra Mishra( R.F.A 299 of 2014

The Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in Sudha Mishra vs. Surya Chandra Mishra (R.F.A 299 of 2014)has ruled that a woman has a right over the property of her husband but she cannot claim a right to live in the house of her parents-in-law

More

Bare Acts

Helpline Law provides a user friendly compendium of Indian Law & Bare Acts. Get a complete list & detail of Indian Bare Acts, with amendments and repeals. It comes with easy-to-use features like Search by bare acts & by year. You can even email the information to yourself!

More

Have a Legal Matter ?
Need a Lawyer?

Have a Legal Matter ?

Need a Lawyer?

Male
Female