2015 (11) TMI 1813 - HC - Indian Laws

Argue the appeal on behalf of petitioner - power agent and not a legal practitioner - Whether the right to appear in Court and plead for a principal as provided under Rule 1 of Order III of Code of Civil Procedure would include the right to address the Court on the strength of the power of attorney? HELD THAT - The petitioner being a third party, is not entitled to address this Court on behalf of his principal. The preliminary issue against the petitioner. It is open to the writ petitioner to argue the matter in person or engage a counsel of his choice.

Issues Involved:
1. Whether the right to appear in Court and plead for a principal under Rule 1 of Order III of the Code of Civil Procedure includes the right to address the Court based on a power of attorney.
2. The distinction between "appear" and "practice" under the Advocates Act.
3. The applicability of the Advocates Act over the Code of Civil Procedure regarding the right to practice law.
4. The role and limitations of a power of attorney holder in legal proceedings.
5. The conditions under which a non-advocate may be permitted to represent a party in Court.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Right to Appear and Plead Under Rule 1 of Order III of the Code of Civil Procedure:
The court examined whether Rule 1 of Order III of the Code of Civil Procedure, which allows recognized agents to appear in court, extends to the right to address the court based on a power of attorney. The petitioner, a power agent, sought permission to argue on behalf of his principal before the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal (DRAT). The court noted that the Advocates Act, 1961, specifically Sections 29 and 33, restricts the right to practice law to enrolled advocates, creating a distinction between "appearance" and "practice."

2. Distinction Between "Appear" and "Practice" Under the Advocates Act:
The court emphasized the difference between "appear" and "practice" in legal contexts. While Section 32 of the Advocates Act allows non-advocates to appear with court permission, Section 33 restricts the right to practice law to enrolled advocates. The court clarified that the right to appear does not equate to the right to practice, which includes acting and pleading.

3. Applicability of the Advocates Act Over the Code of Civil Procedure:
The court highlighted that the Advocates Act is a comprehensive code governing legal practitioners and prevails over the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure. Sections 29 and 33 of the Advocates Act take precedence over Rules 1 and 2 of Order III of the Code of Civil Procedure, limiting the scope of recognized agents to act and appear without extending to practice law.

4. Role and Limitations of a Power of Attorney Holder:
The court discussed the limitations of a power of attorney holder, stating that such an agent can act and appear on behalf of the principal but cannot practice law. The court underscored that the legislature did not intend for non-advocates to address the court, as professional legal representation ensures clarity, responsibility, and adherence to legal ethics.

5. Conditions for Non-Advocate Representation in Court:
The court referred to Section 32 of the Advocates Act, which allows non-advocates to appear with court permission in specific cases. However, such permission is an exception and not a rule, requiring careful consideration of various factors, including the representative's qualifications and the potential impact on justice. The court noted that routine permission to non-advocates could undermine the prohibition in Section 33 of the Act.

Conclusion:
The court concluded that the petitioner, as a power agent, is not entitled to address the court on behalf of his principal. The petitioner must either argue the matter in person or engage a qualified counsel. The preliminary issue was decided against the petitioner, affirming that non-advocates cannot claim the right to practice law based on a power of attorney. The court's decision aligns with the legislative intent to maintain the integrity and professionalism of legal practice.

← Previous Next →