D.K.SETH,J. - (1.) In this case in course of adjudication before the Industrial Tribunal the workman had filed a list of documents on 5th March, 1999 but did not exchange the documents within 10 days from the date of filing of the written statement. The written statement was filed on 13th May, 1999. Thereafter the workman had adduced evidence and he was examined as P.W. 1 and cross-examined. At this state the workman had filed two applications; one for permitting him to file the original document disclosed in the list of documents and the other for recalling himself for being re-examined. These two applications were dismissed by Order Nos. 13 and 14, both dated 14th September, 1999 passed by the learned Second Labour Court, West Bengal in Case No. 10 (IB) (d) 25 of 1998. These two orders have since been challenged.
(2.) Mr. Sahu, learned counsel for the workman points out that section 11 (3) of Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 prescribes the application of the Code of Civil Procedure so far as it relates to the matters as enumerated therein. Therefore, according to him, in tenure of the provisions contained in the Code of Civil Procedure relating to those matters would apply in this case with full force subject to the limitation as prescribed in the Rules. He had relied on some decisions in support of his contention to which reference would be made at appropriate stage. With regard to the question of recalling own witnesses, he had also relied on section 13 of the Industrial Disputes Act and also claimed that Order 18 Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure shall be applicable in such cases in support of which he had relied on some decisions to which reference would be made at appropriate stage.
(3.) Learned counsel for the employer on the other hand contends that the Industrial Disputes Act is a special statute. It only borrowed certain provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure for limited purpose as provided in section 11 of the Industrial Disputes Act. It cannot be stretched beyond the scope for which it is so borrowed and is also subject to rules framed therein. According to him, rules enacted in the special statute providing certain period of limitation, the same is to be given full effect and as soon such limitation expires, the right ceases and cannot be respondent even when it is so permissible under the Code of Civil Procedure. The application of the Code of Civil Procedure is limited to that extent. He also relied on the two judgments in support, of his such contention to which reference would be made at appropriate stage.;