9911796707
TMI Blog1988 (12) TMI 291X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pplication bearing No. 30 of 1984 filed by certain applicants as against the official liquidator in which the applicants had claimed a direction that the official liquidator should hand over the possession of three godowns of which the applicants were the owners, and for payment of a sum of Rs. 7,21,856 being the arrears of compensation calculated at the rate of Rs. 3,962 per month in respect of the same. The claimant represented the official liquidator in the said company application and it appears finally that the matter was disposed of and the claim of the applicants, as far as the payment was concerned, was reduced to Rs. 1,60,000 and the possession of the godowns was ordered to be handed over to the applicants. The claimant had engaged a counsel whose fee has been paid by the official liquidator. After the disposal of the said company application, the claimant submitted his bill of costs in respect of the work done by it to the Taxing Master. In the said bill of costs, the claimant has claimed towards instructions for brief item, a sum of Rs. 32,500. Since the costs have to be taxed, the matter was referred to the Taxing Master. It was argued before the Taxing Master that the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... /G-203/Estt/5310, dated May 12, 1983, of the Official Liquidator, High Court, Bombay, I do order that the Taxing Master, High Court, Bombay, do accept for taxation the bills of costs pertaining to the period after December 31, 1976, lodged by the advocates engaged by the official liquidator in performance of his duties unless otherwise ordered." I am a bit intrigued as to how the Chief Justice could have passed an order as above. There is no provision either under the company law or in the Rules framed under the High Court, Original Side Rules, whereby the Chief Justice could pass an order directing that the Taxing Master should accept for taxation the bills of costs pertaining to the period after December 31, 1976, lodged by the advocates engaged by the official liquidator in performance of his duties unless otherwise ordered. Of course, I am aware of the fact that since then, the Taxing Master as also the official liquidator have been acting pursuant to this order passed by the then learned Chief Justice. In my view, this is not a judicial order nor can this be said to be an administrative order which could have been passed under any provision of law or any of the rules as su ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y of such costs." If one analyses rule 604, it is clear that taxation of bills of costs of attorneys shall be governed by the rules as in force prior to Jannary 1, 1977, in respect of all the pending bills of costs and in respect of new bills of costs to be taxed hereinafter pursuant to rules 601 and 602 above and also for recovery of such costs. Rules 601 and 602 are as follows: "601. In ( a )every suit or proceedings in the High Court disposed of prior to January 1, 1977, ( b )every matter completed prior to January 1, 1977, which is not subject to any proceedings in court, and ( c )any matter whether subject to court proceedings or not, where it is desired to have bill of costs taxed for work done up to December 31, 1976, an attorney shall lodge his bills of costs for taxation whether the bill be between party and party or otherwise on or before December 31, 1982: Provided that bills for costs which could not have been lodged for taxation without an order of the chamber judge under the rules in force prior to January 1, 1977, shall not be accepted by the Taxing Master without an order of the chamber judge, permitting such bills to be lodged on sufficient grounds. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fficer of the court. The taxing officer shall, before passing the bills or charges of an advocate, satisfy himself that the appointment of an advocate to assist the liquidator in the performance of his duties has been duly sanctioned." Therefore, there is no question of the learned Chief Justice passing any general order under any of these provisions. If the official liquidator desires to employ an advocate or attorney, he must take the sanction of the company court, in each individual matter, and the taxing officer, before passing the bills or charges of an advocate, must first satisfy himself that the official liquidator has so obtained the sanction. This takes me to the true position relating to the employment of advocates by the official liquidator and how their bills and charges are to be passed. If the official liquidator desires to employ any advocate, he shall first obtain the sanction of the court in each matter (see section 459 and rule 307). Perhaps, it is possible for him to have the terms and conditions as to fees and charges of the advocates fixed at that stage. Under the Rules, it is the Registrar who shall be the taxing officer of the court for the purpose of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
