9911796707
TMI Blog1963 (1) TMI 51X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hereinafter called the 'Rules'). The said period expired during the summer vacation of the Court. After the summer vacation, the Court reopened on August 4, 1958. Meanwhile, on May, 20, 1958, after the judgment was delivered by this Court, the Advocate wrote to his client informing him about the result of the appeal and intimating to him that the bill of costs had to be filed. On June, 28, 1958, he again wrote to his client and called for ₹ 60/- to meet the necessary expenses in the matter of presenting the bill of costs. This amount was paid to him at Puri on July 26, 1958, and the Advocate passed a receipt in that behalf. He, however, took no further action in the matter until about January 9, 1959, when it appears that he inspected the Court records in order to be able to prepare a defeat bill. A bill was accordingly prepared by him and it was presented in Court on May 19, 1959. Since the bill was obviously filed beyond the period prescribed by O. XL. r. 12 the Office returned the bill to the Advocate. In ordinary course, the Advocate should have filed an application requesting that the delay made in filing the bill should be condoned, but he seems to have taken no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al in question, and if so, whether such conduct amounts to professional or other misconduct within the meaning of that expression in O. IV of the Rules. The report of the Tribunal shows that it has found against the Advocate on both parts of the issue. In its opinion, the conduct of the Advocate amounts to professional misconduct as well as other misconduct within the meaning of the said Order. 3. On receipt of this Report, the proceedings have been placed before us for final disposal under O. IV-A r. 21 of the Rules and the questions which fall for our decision are whether the Tribunal was right in holding that the conduct of the Advocate amounts to professional misconduct and other misconduct and if yes, what is the penalty which should be imposed on the Advocate ? 4. The relevant facts which the Tribunal had to weigh in dealing with the issue referred to it lie within a narrow compass. It is obvious that in filing the bill of costs of May 19, 1959, the Advocate was guilty of gross delay. He knew that O. XL r. 12 required that the bill of costs and vouchers had to be filed within six weeks from the date of judgment and there is no doubt that for filing the bill of costs and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... position when he happened to meet him. The Tribunal was not impressed with this explanation and thought that the conduct of the Advocate in not sending any replies to the queries made by his client rather shows that the advocate knew that he was at fault and he had really no answer to give in respect of the said queries. It is also clear that after the appeal was decided, the Advocate was paid by his client ₹ 60/- obviously with a view to enable him to file the bill of costs. The Tribunal has found that this amount was quite ample under the rules and so, it is not possible to explain the delay made by the Advocate in filing the bill of costs on the ground that he was not put in charge of sufficient funds by his client to meet the expenses in that behalf. 6. A faint attempt was no doubt made by the Advocate to show that he could not file the bill of costs in time because he did not receive the assistance of the High Court lawyer as to the printing charges, etc. Indeed, it does appear that the Advocate wrote a letter on May 20, 1958, calling for some information in respect of the printing charges incurred in the preparation of the paper books in this appeal. As the Tribunal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r delinquency is not to receive a narrow construction. Wherever conduct proved against an Advocate is contrary to honesty, or opposed to good morals, or is unethical, it may be safely held that it involves moral turpitude. A wilfull and callous disregard for the interests of the client may, in a proper case, be characterised as conduct unbefitting an Advocate. In dealing with matters of professional propriety, we cannot ignore the fact that the profession of law is an honourable profession and it occupies a place of pride in the liberal professions of the country. Any conduct which makes a person unworthy to belong to the noble fraternity of lawyers or makes an Advocate unfit to be entrusted with the responsible task of looking after the interests of the litigant, must be regarded as conduct involving moral turpitude. The Advocates-on-record like the other members of the Bar Advocates are Officers of the Court and the purity of the administration of justice depends as much on the integrity of the Judges as on the honesty of the Bar. That is why in dealing with the question as to whether an Advocate has rendered himself unfit to belong to the brotherhood at the Bar, the expression ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... report in the present case. 11. In the matter of An Advocate [(1936) I.L.R. 63 Cal. 867], Mukerji, A.C.J., referred to the observations made by Page J.J. In the matter of An Advocate [(1933) I.L.R. 12 Pan. 110, 113] which showed that the learned Chief Justice thought that in considering whether an advocate should be struck off the roll of Advocates, the test should be whether the proved misconduct of the advocate is such that he must be regarded as unworthy to remain a member of the honourable profession to which he has been admitted and unfit to be entrusted with the responsible duties that an advocate is called upon to perform ; and Mukerji, A.C.J., added that with all respect, I would prefer to take the two conditions laid down as aforesaid disjunctively and apply the test in that way so that on the fulfilment of any one of the conditions the test would be regarded as satisfied. In other words, according to Mukerji A.C.J., misconduct which would render the Advocate liable to be removed from the rolls can be either professional misconduct or other misconduct, with the result that in either case, the advocate ceases to be entitled to belong to the honourable profession of l ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ember of the Bar must be severely dealt with. Healthy traditions at the Bar help not only to make the Bar strong and respected, but render valuable and effective assistance to the Courts to deserve and sustain the absolute confidence and faith of the litigating public in the fairness of the administration of justice, for we must always remember that on the ultimate analysis, the real strength of the administration of justice lies in the confidence of the public at large. We are, therefore, reluctant to accede to the plea made before us by Mr. Sarjoo Prasad that we should reprimand the Advocate for his misconduct and pass no further orders against him. Having carefully considered all the relevant circumstances in this case, we are satisfied that in the interests of the profession itself, it is necessary to direct that the name of the Advocate should be removed from the rolls for five years. We also direct that the Advocate should pay the respondent's costs of the enquiry before the Tribunal and of the hearing before us. Before we part with this matter, we ought to add that it has been conceded before us both by Mr. Sarjoo Prasad and by the learned Solicitor-General that Part V o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
