9911796707
TMI Blog2000 (8) TMI 976X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... far Nagar, being suit No. 177 of 1994. The applicant of application A-51 is an advocate practicing in Muzaffar Nagar who had been engaged by the Official Liquidator under the orders of this Court to defend the suit on behalf of the company aforesaid (in liquidation). Annexure 1 to the application is the letter dated 4-7-1997 sent by the Official Liquidator, Allahabad, to the said applicant-advocate that he had been engaged to defend the suit at Muzaffar Nagar on the fee prescribed under the General Rules (Civil) plus expenses. The order of this Court dated 10-1-1997 was passed on Official Liquidator s Report No. 174 of 1996 which is to the following effect : "Perused the report. The Official Liquidator is permitted to engage an advocate ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by this Court ex parte without any notice to him and without affording any opportunity to him in this behalf. 6. The applicant has prayed for setting aside the order dated 24-2-1999 and for an order to the Official Liquidator to pay his fee as per the earlier order dated 10-1-1997. 7. The Official Liquidator has filed a counter affidavit A56. It has very candidly been admitted in paragraph 9 of the counter affidavit that the order dated 24-2-1999 was passed by this Court without affording any opportunity to the applicant. Nor had the consent of the applicant advocate been taken for the reduction of his fee. Paragraph 11 of the counter affidavit states that the matter is purely of administrative nature and this Court may pass appr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... akh. However, it is also a fact that the suit had not been decided when it was pending before the Civil Judge, Muzaffar Nagar, and is still before the Debt Recovery Tribunal. Indeed, the Official Liquidator has to incur extra expenses on behalf of the company to defend the case before the Debt Recovery Tribunal. Shri R.P. Agarwal, the learned counsel for the Official Liquidator, suggested, in the presence of the Official Liquidator, that the matter of the payment of the Court fee be settled amicably and payment of Rs. 25,000 may be ordered to be made to the applicant minus Rs. 2,000 already paid to him. 10. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, I think it proper to order payment of Rs. 30,000 to the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
