R.JAYASIMHA BABU, J.

The appellant is the employer. It is aggrieved by the fact that the dispute between it and one of it's former employees was referred for adjudication to the Central Government Industrial Tribunal functioning at Chennai.

2. According to the appellant, the said Tribunal at Chennai has no jurisdiction to try the matter, as the appellant does not have its industry at Chennai and the former employee had not been employed by it at any place within the State of Tamil Nadu. He had been employed outside the State and the place at which he was working at the time his employment was terminated was at Bharuch in Gujarat. The employer has its head office at Delhi. It does not have a branch at Chennai or elsewhere in the State of Tamil Nadu.

3. Learned counsel for the appellant took us through the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act and also referred us to several judgments of the Supreme Court and various High Courts in support of his submission that the object of the Industrial Disputes Act is to promote industrial peace and in order to achieve that object any dispute concerning an industry and it's workmen should be tried and decided by a Labour Court or a