9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (8) TMI 1304X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... di alteram partem. The requisite degree of restraint and sobriety expected in such situations is also found to be missing in the offending comments. The tenor of the remarks recorded against the Appellant will not only demean him amongst his professional colleagues but may also adversely impact his professional career. If the comments remain unexpunged in the court judgments, it will be a cross that the Appellant will have to bear, all his life. To allow him to suffer thus, would be prejudicial and unjust. The offending remarks recorded by the learned judge against the Appellant should not have been recorded in the manner it was done. The Appellant whose professional conduct was questioned, was not provided any opportunity to explain his conduct or defend himself - Appeal disposed off. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the same for procuring an interim order by suppressing material fact. 17. The counsel for the Petitioner is a seasonal advocate he owes a responsibility towards the institution and fraternity too, he had deliberately created a wrong example for the pious institution. *** *** *** *** *** 5. Similarly, in the second case, i.e., S.A. No. 190/2019 the learned Judge on 22.11.2019 recorded the following comments: *** *** *** *** *** 2. In the present Second Appeal, when the argument for the learned Counsel for the Appellant was initiated too be addressed for quite some time, this Court is of the view that the tenacity of argument of the learned Counsel for the Plaintiff/Appellant was in a manner as if, he was intentionally attempting to make a mountain of a mole, which this Court will not hesitate to re mark that was a brutal assassination of time for those other litigants, whose matters were pending consideration on the said date before this Court. 'It further reflected that as if it was not an argument for the case but rather for the visitors' gallery. *** *** *** *** *** 6. In the third judgment, i.e., S.A. 182 of 2019 dated 12.03.2020, the following unacceptable ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of 1972. Though for the reasons to be recorded hereinafter, it could be apparently inferred, that even most of the judgments, on which, reliance has been made, are not even relevant for the purposes of consideration of the case, and even they may not be applicable under the facts and circumstances of the present case. 4. This attitude, adopted cannot be ruled out to be a professional and a strategic device, which is being adopted, so that Court may at the stage of hearing for admission of writ, due to paucity of time, would be constraint to admit, even the Writ Petitions, which are arising from concurrent judgments, in a summary rent control proceedings, where grant of interim order would become inevitable during its pendency, besides being taxing on the litigant also, to meet the artificially escalated expenses too, and this strategy is not an isolated example, but rather it is a regular feature, which had been adopted by the Counsel, as a routine in most of the cases, which are being instituted from his Chamber. This methodology is being deliberately adopted with a premonition, that if judgment is put to challenge before a superior platform, he may have his argument protected ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... down the following tests to be applied while dealing with the question of expunction of disparaging remarks against a person whose conduct comes in for consideration before a Court of law. Those tests are: (a) Whether the party whose conduct is in question is before the court or has an opportunity of explaining or defending himself; (b) Whether there is evidence on record bearing on that conduct justifying the remarks; and (c) Whether it is necessary for the decision of the case, as an integral part thereof, to animadvert on that conduct. 10. In Alok Kumar Roy v. Dr. S.N. Sarma (1968) 1 SCR 813, in the opinion written by Justice C.K. Wanchoo for a Five Judges Bench, this Court had emphasized that even in cases of justified criticism, the language employed must be of utmost restraint. The use of carping language to disapprove of the conduct of the Counsel would not be an act of sobriety, moderation or restraint. 11. The judgment of this Court in A.M. Mathur v. Pramod Kumar Gupta (1990) 2 SCC 533, delivered by Justice K. Jagannatha Shetty, elaborates on the need to avoid even the appearance of bitterness. The Court observed that, 13...The duty of restraint, this humility o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... feel that those could have been avoided as they were unnecessary for deciding the disputes. Moreover, they appear to be based on the personal perception of the learned Judge. It is also apparent that the learned Judge did not, before recording the adverse comments, give any opportunity to the Appellant to put forth his explanation. The remarks so recorded have cast aspersion on the professional integrity of the Appellant. Such condemnation of the Counsel, without giving him an opportunity of being heard would be a negation of the principles of audi alteram partem. The requisite degree of restraint and sobriety expected in such situations is also found to be missing in the offending comments. 17. The tenor of the remarks recorded against the Appellant will not only demean him amongst his professional colleagues but may also adversely impact his professional career. If the comments remain unexpunged in the court judgments, it will be a cross that the Appellant will have to bear, all his life. To allow him to suffer thus, would in our view be prejudicial and unjust. 18. In view of the forgoing, we are of the considered opinion that the offending remarks recorded by the learned judg ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
