9911796707
TMI Blog1937 (4) TMI 24X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... business as a solicitor or attorney, drafting, engrossing and filing plaint, Judge's summons, affidavits and generally issuing legal process and Charge fees to the principal. 2. That all three questions stand to be answered in the negative seems to us to be clear; but as the respondent has definitely asserted a right to the notice specified in question 2, and certainly by strong implication if not by his conduct to the right of audience stated in question 1 and the matters in question 3 also arise both out of his conduct and claim, we consider that this matter which is of course of extreme importance to the legal profession should be fully discussed by us. The matter arises in the following way: The respondent; is the holder of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . R Srinivasa Iyengar, and he further stated that Krishnammal did this in order to deprive him of the remuneration due to him payable by her; and he claimed that the power of attorney was of the same force and validity as that of a vakalat and that, unless it was revoked by formal proceedings through Court, no orders could be passed on the petition. Therefore, by reason of the authority given to him in the power of attorney, he claimed the same right as a legal practitioner who has been given a vakalat; and since the power of attorney authorizes him to plead in Court, it follows that he claims that right; and indeed we are informed that either in these proceedings or in some other, K.P. Lakshmana Rao, J. allowed him to address the Court. In ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... In the former, a recognized power of attorney agent claimed a right to plead in Court on behalf of his principal under Order 3, Rule 1, Civil P.C., but it was held by Jenkins, C.J. and Chaterjea, J. that he bad no right of audience; and in the latter case, a director of a company holding a power of attorney, authorizing him to appear for and on behalf of the company, to conduct and represent the company in the proceedings, claimed the right of audience on behalf of the company and, applying the ruling in the former case, it was held that he had no right of audience. It is plain from these three cases that Rules 1 and 2 of Order 3, Civil P. C, do not give the recognized agent any right to plead in Court on behalf of his principal either in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... se advocates, vakils or attorneys, and enacts thus: No person whatsoever but such advocates, vakils or attorneys shall be allowed to act or to plead for, or on behalf of any suitor in the said High Court, except that any suitors shall be allowed to appear, plead or act on his own behalf or on behalf of a co-suitor. 6. These two clauses are sufficient to dispose of the respondent's claim and in addition, Section 8 of the Bar Councils Act is equally definite. It is as follows: No person shall be entitled as of right to practise in any High Court unless his name is entered in the roll of the advocates of the High Court maintained under this Act; provided that nothing in this subsection shall apply to any attorney of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t of a pleader from appearing before the Court except in the absence of his pleader or to make any application or do any act in person so long as the appointment is in force; and there are similar provisions in the Appellate Side Rules. By reason of these rules the respondent claims that as his power of attorney authorizing him to appear in Court and plead on behalf of Krishnammal has not been revoked, she is not entitled to give an appointment to Mr. T.R. Srinivasa Aiyangar to act for her. But as an agent under a power of attorney has no right of audience in Court, it follows that the power of attorney authorizing him to plead is of no force whatsoever and upon that ground alone his contention must fail. But quite apart from that difficult ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... prepared to act in such matters for remuneration. Even one isolated act has in England been held to constitute acting as a solicitor rendering persons guilty of such conduct liable to be dealt with Under Section 26, Solicitors Act of 1860, for contempt of Court: In re Ainsworth; Ex parte Incorporated Law Society (1906) 2 KB 103. In that case an unqualified person gave as agent for the defendant in an action the notice of appearance to the writ required by Order 12, Rule 9 of the Supreme Court Rules, to be given by the defendant to the plain. tiff or his solicitor and he was held to be noting in contravention of Section 2, Solicitors Act of 1843, which prohibits any unqualified person from acting as a solicitor or carrying on any proce ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
