TMI Blog2020 (12) TMI 1075X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e is a specific bar for doing money lending business that too with his own client, the act of the respondent is amount to professional misconduct. Therefore, the entire proceedings initiated as against the petitioner is nothing but clear abuse of process of law and the complaint itself is liable to be quashed. Petition allowed. - CRL.O.P.No.1051 of 2020 and Crl.MP.Nos.641 & 643 of 2020 - - - Dated:- 29-7-2020 - THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN For the Petitioner : Mr.R.Thirumoorthy For the Respondent : Mr.W.Camyles Gandhi ORDER This petition has been filed to quash the proceeding in C.C.No.3560 of 2019 on the file of the learned Metropolitan Magistrate (Fast Tract Court-II), Egmore, Chennai, thereby take ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g business for interest. Therefore the entire proceedings is liable to be quashed. 3. Per contra, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent would submit that the petitioner is a known friend of the respondent and for his business development and also for his personal expenditure, the petitioner borrowed a sum of ₹ 3 lakhs from the respondent and also assured that he will pay interest to the said amount. Towards the repayment of the said amount, the petitioner issued a cheque for a sum of ₹ 3,00,000/- on 31.05.2016 and the same was presented for collection. The said cheque was returned dishonour for the reason that Funds Insufficient . After issuing statutory notice, the respondent lodged the present complaint for the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t of India held as follows :- 12. One of the issues was dealt with by a single Bench Judgment of the Madras High Court in C. Manohar versus B.R. Poornima. R. Banumathi, J (as her Lordship then was) held that no presumption could arise merely by issuance of a cheque that amount stipulated in the cheque was payable towards fee. In absence of independent proof, issuance of cheque could not furnish cause of action under Section 138 of the Act in the context 4 J.S. Vasu versus State of Punjab (1994) 1 SCC 184, para 20 5 (2004) Crl.L.J 443 of an advocate or client. The observations relevant in the context are as follows : ......The case in hand is an example of the present day trend of the legal profession. Legal profession is essentia ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al consequences. 14. Case of the complainant is that on behalf of the accused, he has filed claim petitions in M. C. O. P. Nos. 2339 of 1992 and 246 of 1993. Two civil cases were also filed. There is nothing to show that the complainant/Advocate himself has paid the stamp duty and bore the legal fees. The complainant has not produced any agreement showing as to what was the arrangement between him and the accused, as to how much is the fee payable and whether the accused agreed for payment of stamp duty by her counsel itself. In the absence of any agreement, Ex. P-1 cheque cannot be said to have been issued for the purpose of discharge of any substantial debt or liability. Urging the Court to raise the presumption under Section 139 N. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the legal profession. If an advocate has interest in success of litigation, he may tend to depart from ethics. 14. In the matter of G.Senior Advocate of the Supreme Court, this Court held that the claim of an advocate based on a share in the subject matter is a professional misconduct. In VC Rangadurai versus D. Gopalan, it was observed that relation between a lawyer and his client is highly fiduciary in nature. The advocate is in the position of trust. 15. Rule 20 of Part VI, Chapter II, Section II of the Standard of Professional Conduct and Etiquette reads as follows : An advocate shall not stipulate for a fee contingent on the results of litigation or agree to share the proceeds thereof. 16. Thus, mere issuanc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
